LJBHARY  OF  PRINCETON 


THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY 


BX  955  .B45  1921 
Bell,  Mary  I.  M.  Ottley, 
A  short  history  of  the 
papacy 


^HAS-B'^AURIATCoi 


A 

SHORT  HISTORY  OF 
THE  PAPACY 


A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF 
THE  PAPACY 


BY 


MARY  I.  M.  BELL 


WITH    TWO    MAPS 


LIBRARY  OF  PRINCETON 


FEB  1  4  2(Xn 


THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY 


NEW  YORK 

DODD,   MEAD  AND  COMPANY 

1921 


DEDICATED    TO 
THE    MEMORY    OF    MY    FATHER 

EDWARD   BICKERSTETH   OTTLEY 


PREFACE 

AHISTOEY  of  the  Papacy  must  claim  to  be, 
through  many  centuries,  a  history  of  the 
world.  The  author  of  a  short  history  of 
the  Papacy  has  therefore  to  choose  between  two  al- 
ternatives, and  either  to  construct  a  chronology  of 
events  or  to  concentrate  on  the  moments  of  great 
importance,  connecting  them  by  a  thin  thread  of  nar- 
rative from  which  much  that  is  relevant  will  be  omitted 
for  lack  of  space.  I  have  tried  to  follow  the  second 
method  in  writing  this  book,  and  I  must  ask  the  indul- 
gence of  those  whose  interest  in  the  Papacy  is  chiefly 
concentrated  in  some  special  aspect  or  epoch  or  sphere 
of  intluence  if  this  is  very  slightly  indicated  or  even 
entirely  omitted.  If  we  admit  that  religion  has  a  claim 
to  penetrate  every  department  of  life,  we  must  concede 
to  the  Papacy,  as  a  spiritual  institution,  the  obligation 
to  exert  its  influence  in  every  sphere  of  human  activity. 
We  cannot,  in  a  short  book,  follow  the  Popes  in  the 
whole  wide  sweep  of  their  spiritual  imperium.  But  I 
have  tried  here  to  give  a  continuous  account  of  its  evo- 
lution in  history,  and  particularly  to  concentrate  on  the 
intellectual  principles  by  which  the  Papacy  has  been 
supported  or  opposed. 

History  is  not  theology,  and  I  have  tried  to  keep 
the  narrative  free  from  doctrinal  controversy.     But  a 


viii  A  SHOKT  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

true  interpretation  of  the  historical  Papacy  must  be 
one  in  which  the  emphasis  is  laid,  negatively  as  well 
as  positively,  on  the  spiritual  idea  in  which  it  was 
conceived. 

I  wish  to  thank  those  who  have  helped  me  with 
advice  and  guidance,  and  in  particular  my  friend  and 
tutor,  Mr.  Edward  Armstrong,  to  whom  the  conception 
of  the  book  and  much  else  is  due.  I  also  wish  to  thank 
my  brother,  Captain  L.  E.  Ottley  for  making  the  index, 
which  my  absence  from  England  obliged  me  to  leave  to 
him.  I  am  indebted  to  my  husband  for  preparing 
the  maps. 

MARY  I.  M.  BELL 


CONTENTS 


VPTKR  PAGE 

PREFACE vii 

THE  POPES xi 

PART  I 
THE  RISE  OF  SPIRITUAL  POWER 

I.     THE  ORIGIN  OF  SPIRITUAL  POWER 3 

II.    THE  CONVERSION  OF  CONSTANTINE  AND  ITS  EFFECTS, 

A.D.  312-403 9 

III.  THE   FALL  OF   ROME   TO   THE   COUNCIL  OF  EPHESUS, 

A.D.  403-431 16 

IV.  LEO    THE    GREAT:    THE    HUNS    AND    THE    VANDALS, 

A.D.  431-460 22 

V.     GOTHIC  RULE,  a.d.  461-568 28 

VI.     MORAL    SUPREMACY:    THE    EPOCH    OF    GREGORY   THE 

GREAT,  A.D.  568-604 37 

PART  II 
THE  DARK  AGES 

VII.  THE  BREACH  BETWEEN  EAST  AND  WEST— 

Part  I. — The  Opening  of  the  Breach,  a.d.  604-701      -        -      51 
Part  II. — The  Widening  of  the  Gulf,  a.d.  704-751      -         -       55 
VIII.     THE   APPEAL   TO   THE  FRANKS,  AND  THE   REVIVAL  OF 

THE  WESTERN  EMPIRE,  a.d.  741-800     -         -         :         -       60 
IX.     DECAY  OF  THE   CAROLINGIAN  EMPIRE,  a.d.  800-867         -       72 
X.     ARISTOCRATIC  TYRANNY  AND  SUBJECT  POPES,  a.d.  867-954       82 
XI.     THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  REFORM  :    THE   POPES  AND  THE 

OTTOS,  A.D.  955-1046 90 

XII.     THE  PAPACY  UNDER  HILDEBRAND,  a.d.  1046-1085— 

Part  I. — Hildebrand 105 

Part  II.— Gregory  VII. 114 

ix 


A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 


CHAPTER 

XIII. 

XIV. 

XV. 

XVI. 
XVII. 

XVIII. 

XIX. 

XX. 
XXI. 


PART  III 
THE  MIDDLE  AGES 

PAGE 

THE  INVESTITURE  WAR,  a.d.  1085-1122       -        -        -        -  127 

THE  REPUBLICAN  MOVEMENT,  a.d.  1122-1179  -  -  -  142 
CONSOLIDATION  OF  PAPAL  MONARCHY :  THE  EPOCH  OF 

INNOCENT  IIL,  a.d.  1179-1217 155 

THE  CONTEST  WITH  FREDERICK  STUPOR  MUNDI  -  -  167 
THE  LAST  STRUGGLE  WITH  THE  HOHENSTAUFEN  AND 

THE  COMING  OF  THE  FRENCH,  a.d.  1251-1276  -  -  178 
THE  FALL  OF  THE  MEDIAEVAL  PAPACY :  BONIFACE  VIII., 

A.D.  1276-1303 190 

THE  BABYLONISH  CAPTIVITY  AND  THE  BEGINNINGS  OF 

THE  INTELLECTUAL  REVIVAL,  a.d.  1303-1334     -         -  201 

WHEN  ISRAEL  CAME  OUT  OP  EGYPT,  a.d.  1334-1370  -  215 

THE  SCHISM  AND  THE  COUNCILS,  a.d.  1370-1418  -  227 


PART  IV 
THE  RENAISSANCE  AND  THE  REFORMATION 

XXII.     THE   RECOVERY:    MARTIN  V.  AND    EUGENIUS   IV.,   a.d. 

1418-1447 247 

XXIII.  THE  RENAISSANCE  POPES,  a.d.  1447-1471   -        -        -        -     262 

XXIV.  THE  SECULAR  PAPACY,  1471-1503 279 

XXV.     JULIUS    II.    AND    LEO    X.:    THE    PAPACY    AMONG    THE 

DYNASTIES,  a.d.  1503-1521 299 

XXVL     THE  REFORMATION,  a.d.  1517-1550 311 

XXVII.     THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 345 


PART  V 
THE  PAPACY  IN  MODERN  HISTORY 

XXVIII.    THE  COUNTER-REFORMATION,  a.d.  1555-1605      -        -        -  329 

XXIX.     THE  CENTURY  OF  THE  ENLIGHTENMENT,  a.d.  1700-1846  360 

XXX.     CONCLUSION 378 

INDEX -         -  387 

MAPS 

FACING  PAGE 

I.     ITALY  IN  THE  MIDDLE  AGES 142 

II.     CENTRAL  EUROPE 329 


THE  POPES 


A.D. 

A.D. 

U2. 

S.  Peter. 

402. 

Innocent  I. 

167 

Linus. 

417. 

Zosimus. 

>68 

Clement. 

418. 

Boniface  I. 

178. 

Anacletua. 

418. 

Eulalius  (anti-pope). 

191. 

Clement. 

422. 

Celestine  I. 

'100 

Evarestus. 

432. 

Sixtu3  III. 

>109. 

Alexander. 

440. 

Leo  I.  (the  Great). 

119. 

Sixtus  I. 

461. 

Hilarius. 

129. 

Telesphorus. 

468. 

Simplicius. 

139. 

Hyginus. 

483. 

Felix  III. 

143. 

Pius  I. 

492. 

Gelasius  I. 

157. 

Anicetus. 

496. 

Anastasius  II. 

168. 

Soter. 

498. 

Symmachus. 

177. 

Eleutherius. 

498. 

Laurentius  (anti-pope). 

193. 

Victor  (?) 

514. 

Hormisdas. 

202. 

Zephyrinua  (?) 

523. 

John  I. 

219. 

Calixtus  I. 

526. 

Felix  IV. 

223. 

Urban  I. 

530. 

Boniface  II. 

230. 

Pontianus. 

530. 

Dioscorus  (anti-pope). 

235. 

Anterius. 

532. 

John  II. 

236. 

FabianuB. 

535. 

Agapetus  I. 

251. 

Cornelius. 

536. 

Silverius. 

252. 

Lucius  I. 

537. 

Vigilius. 

253. 

Stephen  I. 

555. 

Pelagius  I. 

257. 

Sixtus  IT. 

560. 

John  III. 

259. 

Dionysius. 

574. 

Benedict  I. 

269. 

Felix. 

678. 

Pelagius  II. 

275. 

Eutychianus. 

590. 

Gregory  I.  (the  Great). 

283. 

Caius. 

604. 

Sabinianus. 

295. 

Marcellinus. 

607. 

Boniface  III. 

304. 

Vacancy. 

607. 

Boniface  IV. 

308. 

Marcellus  I. 

615. 

Deusdedit. 

310. 

Kusebius. 

618. 

Boniface  V. 

311. 

Melchiades. 

625. 

Honorius  I. 

314. 

Sylvester  I. 

638. 

Severinus. 

336. 

Marcus  I. 

640. 

John  IV. 

337. 

Julius  I. 

642. 

Theodorus  I. 

352. 

Liberius. 

649. 

Martin  I. 

356. 

Felix  (anti-pope). 

654. 

Eugenius  I. 

366. 

Damasus  I. 

657. 

Vital  ianus. 

384. 

Siricius. 

672. 

Adeodatus. 

398. 

Anastasius  I. 

676. 

Donus  I. 

1 

These  dates  cannot  be  taken  a 

LS  hist< 

jrically  proven.     They  rest 

on 

evidence  varying  in  its  degree  of  authenticity. 


xu 


A  SHOET  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 


A.D. 

678.  Agatho. 

682.  Leo  II. 

683. (?)  Benedict  II. 

685.  John  V. 

685. (?)  Conon. 

687.  Sergius  I. 

687.  Paschal  (anti-pope). 

687.  Theodore         „ 

701.  John  VI. 

705.  John  VII. 

708.  Sisinnius. 

708.  Constantine. 

715.  Gregory  II. 

731.  Gregory  III. 

741.  Zacharias. 

752.  Stephen  (II.). 

752.  Stephen  n.  (or  HI.). 

757.  Paul  I. 

767.  Constantino  (anti-pope). 

768.  Stephen  in.  (or  IV.). 
772.  Hadrian  I. 

795.  Leo  m. 

816.  Stephen  IV. 

817.  Paschal  I. 
824.  Eugenius  11. 
827.  Valentinus. 
827.  Gregory  IV. 
844.  Sergius  11. 
847.  Leo  IV. 
855.  Benedict  HI. 

855.  Anastasius  (ant i- pope). 

858.  Nicholas  I. 

867.  Hadrian  H. 

872.  John  VIII. 

882.  Martin  II. 

884.  Hadrian  III. 

885.  Stephen  V. 
891.  Formosus. 
896.  Boniface  VI. 

896.  Stephen  VI. 

897.  Romanus. 

897.  Theodore  H. 

898.  John  IX. 
900.     Benedict  IV. 
903.     Leo  V. 

903.  Christopher. 

904.  Sergius  m. 
911.     Anastasius  IH. 

913.  Lando. 

914.  John  X. 

928.  Leo  VI. 

929.  Stephen  VII. 
931.     John  XI. 
936.     Leo  VII. 
939.     Stephen  VHI. 
941.     Martin  HI. 


A.D. 

946.  Agapetus  II. 

955.  John  XII. 

963.  Leo  VIII. 

964.  Benedict  V.  (anti-pope). 

965.  John  XIII. 
972.  Benedict  VL 

974.  Boniface  VII.  (anti-pope). 

974.  Domnus  II.  (?). 

974.  Benedict  VII. 

983.  John  XIV. 

985.  John  XV. 

996.  Gregory  V. 

996.  John  XVI.  (anti-pope). 

999.  Sylvester  II. 

1003.  John  XVII. 

1003.  John  XVIII. 

1009.  Sergius  IV. 

1012.  Benedict  VIII. 

1024.  John  XIX. 

1033.  Benedict  IX. 

1044.  Sylvester  (anti-pope). 

1045.  Gregory  VI. 

1046.  Clement  II. 
1048.  Damasus  II. 
1054.  Victor  II. 

1057.  Stephen  IX. 

1058.  Benedict  X. 

1059.  Nicholas  II. 
1061.  Alexander  II. 

1073.  Gregory  VII.  (Hildebrand). 

1080.  Clement  (anti-pope). 

1086.  Victor  III. 

1087.  Urban  II. 
1099.     Paschal  II. 

1102.     Albert  (anti-pope). 
1105.     Sylvester       ,, 

1118.  Gelasius. 

1118.  Gregory  (anti-pope). 

1119.  Calixtus  II. 

1121.     Celestine  (anti-pope). 

1124.     Honorius  II. 

1130.     Innocent  H. 

1130.     Anacletus  (anti-pope). 

1138.     Victor  „ 

1143.  Celestine  H. 

1144.  Lucius  H. 

1145.  Eugenius  HI. 

1153.  Anastasius  TV. 

1154.  Hadiian  IV. 
1159.     Alexander  HI. 
1159.     Victor  (anti-pope). 
1164.     Paschal         „ 
1168.     Calixtus       „ 
1181.     Lucius  in. 

1185.     Urban  IH. 
1187.     Gregory  VIH. 


A.D. 

1187. 

1191. 

1198. 

121b. 

1227. 

1241. 

1243. 

1254. 

1261. 

1265. 

1269. 

1271. 

1276. 

1276. 

1277. 

1277. 

1281. 

1285. 

1289. 

1292. 

1294. 

1294. 

1303. 

1305. 

1314. 

1316. 

1334. 

1342. 

1352. 

1362. 

1370. 

1378. 

1378. 

1389. 

1394. 

1404. 

1406. 

1409. 

1410. 

1417. 

1431. 
^1439. 
^"1447. 

1455. 

1468. 

1464. 

1471. 


THE  POPES 

Clement  HI. 

A.D. 

1484. 

Innocent  VIII. 

Celestine  III. 

1493. 

Alexander  VI. 

Innocent  III. 

1503. 

Pius  m. 

Honorius  III. 

1503. 

Julius  II. 

Gregory  IX. 

1513. 

Leo  X. 

Celestine  FV. 

1522. 

Hadrian  VI. 

Innocent  IV. 

1523. 

Clement  VH. 

Alexander  IV. 

1534. 

Paul  HI. 

Urban  IV. 

1550. 

Julius  HI. 

Clement  IV. 

1555. 

Marcellus  II. 

Vacancy. 

1555. 

Paul  IV. 

Gregory  X. 

1559. 

Pius  IV. 

Innocent  V. 

1566. 

Pius  V. 

Hadrian  V. 

1572. 

Gregory  XIII. 

John  XX.  (or  XXI.) 

1585. 

Sixtus  V. 

Nicholas  HI. 

1590. 

Urban  VH. 

Martin  IV. 

1590. 

Gregory  XIV. 

Honoriu.s  IV. 

1591. 

Innocent  IX. 

Nicholas  IV. 

1592. 

Clement  VIH. 

Vacancy. 

1604. 

Leo  XI. 

Celestine  V. 

1604. 

Paul  V. 

Boniface  VIII. 

1621. 

Gregory  XV. 

Benedict  XI. 

1623. 

Urban  VHI. 

Clement  V. 

1644. 

Innocent  X. 

Vacancy. 

1655. 

Alexander  VII. 

John  XXI.  (or  XXII.) 

1667. 

Clement  IX. 

Benedict  XH. 

1670. 

Clement  X. 

Clement  VI. 

1676. 

Innocent  XI. 

Innocent  VI. 

1689. 

Alexander  VIII 

Urban  V. 

1691. 

Innocent  XII. 

Gregory  XI. 

1700. 

Clement  XI. 

Urban  VI. 

1720. 

Innocent  XIII. 

Clement  VII.  (anti-pope).  ■ 

1724. 

Benedict  XHI. 

Boniface  IX. 

1730. 

Clement  XH. 

Benedict  (anti-pope). - 

1740. 

Benedict  XIV. 

Innocent  Vn. 

1758. 

Clement  XHT. 

Gregory  XH.    .  . 

1769. 

Clement  XIV. 

Alexander  V.  '    '.  << 

1775. 

Pius  VI. 

John  XXn.  (or  XXIU.) 

1800. 

Pius  VH. 

Martin  V. 

1823. 

LeoXH. 

Eugenius  IV. 

1829. 

Pius  VHI. 

Felix  V.  (anti-pope).     .  ._ 

1831. 

Gregory  XVI. 

Nicholas  V. 

1846. 

Pius  IX. 

Calixtus  IV. 

1878. 

Leo  XHI. 

PiusH. 

1903. 

Pius  X. 

Paul  n. 

1914. 

Benedict  XV. 

Sixtua  IV. 

XllI 


PART  I 
THE  RISE   OF  SPIRITUAL  POWER 


CHAPTER  1 
THE   ORIGIN  OF  SPIRITUAL  POWER 

"  "W"     IKE  almost  all  the  great  works  of  nature  and  of  human 

I  power,  the  Papacy  grew  up  in  silence  and  obscurity." 

■^ — ^  But  the  silence  is  as  eloquent  as  the  obscurity  is  em- 
blematic of  the  great  future  ;  for  both  served  as  hidden  sources 
whence  the  makers  of  the  Papacy  were  to  draw  their  warrants  in 
later  generations,  for  temporal  accretion  as  well  as  spiritual  ex- 
pansion. 

The  history  of  the  Papacy  has  no  definite  beginning.  We 
may  accept  the  assertion  that  Leo  I.,  or  possibly  his  forerunner 
Innocent,  was  in  fact  the  first  Pope — the  first  Bishop  of  Rome, 
that  is,  who  claimed  a  distinct  spiritual  overlordship.  But  the 
fifth  century  cannot  be  isolated  from  the  ages  which  preceded  it, 
for  an  epoch  can  only  stand  out  in  relation  to  the  period  which 
leads  up  to  it.  To  St.  Peter  and  the  legends  of  St.  Peter  the 
historian  must  look  for  the  birth  of  the  Papacy,  if  for  no  other 
reason  than  because  it  was  to  the  age  of  St.  Peter  that  the 
architects  of  papal  power  turned  in  their  efi'orts  to  construct  a 
historical  basis  for  their  magnificent  conception. 

But  it  is  in  this  that  the  modern  historian  of  the  Papacy 
difi'ers  most  widely  from  his  early  predecessors,  for  he  has  to 
cope  with  the  acts  of  St.  Peter,  not  as  historical  landmarks  to  be 
proved  or  disproved,  but  as  ideas  of  the  greatest  importance,  in 
so  far  as  they  become  articles  of  faith  to  the  supporters  of  papal 
power  or  canons  of  unbelief  to  its  opponents.  Whether  St.  Peter 
actually  founded  the  Papacy,  or  whether  the  Popes  evolved  the 
legend  that  he  did  so,  is  irrelevant  to  the  story  of  the  Papacy, 
and  we  can  fortunately  leave  it  to  theologians  to  decide  as  to  the 
degree  of  probability  which  the  facts  warrant,  and  their  validity 
as  arguments  for  or  against  the  great  cause  in  which  they  were 
afterwards  pleaded. 

Of  St.  Peter's  own  Bishopric  of  Rome  nothing  is  known,  and 
even  tradition  is  comparatively  silent.  His  death  in  the  year  64 
is,  however,  so  well  attested  by  the  earliest  traditions,  and  so 
consistently  dwelt  upon,  that  there  seems  no  reason  for  doubting 


4  A  SHORT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

its  occurrence  at  that  date.  By  the  year  200  the  tomb  of  the 
two  Apostles  is  shown  by  Caius.  Moreover,  the  traditional  date 
of  St.  Peter's  martyrdom  coincides  with  the  date  of  the  burning 
of  Rome  and  the  Neronian  persecution  which  followed.  From 
the  earliest  beginnings,  the  See  of  Rome  is  associated  with  the 
name  of  St.  Peter,  and  by  the  middle  of  the  second  century  it  is 
mentioned  by  Irenseus,  Clement,  Origen,  and  Tertullian.  In  the 
third  century  it  is  already  used  by  the  Popes  as  a  claim  to 
supremacy,  and  it  is  remarkable  that  the  legend,  though  resting 
on  no  definite  authority,  is  at  least  sufi'ered  to  pass  unchallenged. 
It  is  clear  that  the  first  Bishops  of  Rome  were  in  no  sense  of 
the  word  spiritual  lords  of  Christendom.  They  were  obscure 
and  for  the  most  part  insignificant  persons,  who  walked  their 
unassuming  way  unchallenged  by  the  State  and  unnoticed  save 
by  the  little  Greek  colony  of  believers  who  looked  on  them  as 
shepherds.  We  know  practically  nothing  of  these  precursors  of 
papal  history  save  where  their  shadowy  forms  are  occasionally 
brought  to  light  in  the  glare  of  persecution.  Their  names  alone 
come  down  to  us,  attached  by  the  loving  piety  of  later  ages  to 
the  fictitious  title  of  martyr.  This  much  is  embodied  in  the 
various  lists  of  the  first  four  centuries,  which  have  a  value  above 
and  beyond  their  intrinsic  worth,  as  showing  that  the  succession 
to  the  Roman  bishopric  was  a  matter  of  interest,  even  of  con- 
troversy, among-  distant  ecclesiastics.  The  earliest  of  these 
which  is  still  extant  is  that  of  St,  Irenseus  (c.  160)  and  the  widest 
known  is  the  "Catalogus  Liberianus "  from  which  was  taken 
the  earliest  edition  of  the  "  Liber  Pontificalis  ".  Of  the  informa- 
tion which  can  be  gleaned  from  other  sources,  there  is  a  general 
absence  of  any  mention  of  the  bishops  themselves,  and  still  less 
can  we  gather  anything  like  a  conception  of  the  relations  in 
which  they  stood  either  towards  their  own  immediate  flock  or 
towards  that  wider  dominion  which  they  were  afterwards  to 
claim.  The  first  to  lift  the  veil  which  hides  the  nascent  Papacy 
completely  from  view  was  St.  Clement,  the  third  successor  of  the 
Apostles.  His  letter  to  the  Church  at  Corinth  is  one  of  the  most 
remarkable  documents  with  which  the  historian  of  the  early 
Church  has  to  deal,  and  it  is  tempting  to  regard  it  as  typical  of 
the  moment  in  papal  history  to  which  it  belongs.  In  that  case, 
the  Roman  Church  is  still  in  this  early  period  very  Jewish  in 
character.  The  fall  of  Jerusalem  in  the  year  70  had  brought  a 
fresh  influx  of  Jews  to  Rome  and  an  edict  of  Tolerance  following 
on  the  proscriptions  of  Nero  further  strengthened  the  Semitic 
element  which  had  from  the  first  been  predominant.  But  at 
the  samo  tirne,  there  had  been  converts  in  high  places  ;  members 


THE  OKIGIN  OF  SPIKITUAL  POWER  6 

of  great  families,  such  as  the  Pomponii,  the  Acilii,  and  the 
Flavii  were  counted  among  the  Nazarites,  and  in  the  years  91 
and  95  there  were  two  Christian  consuls,  one  of  whom  suffered 
martyrdom.  St.  Clement  is  however  a  Roman  of  Romans :  he 
gives  expression  to  the  patriotism  and  self-esteem  becoming  in 
a  citizen  of  the  world  capital,  and  his  letter  to  the  distracted 
Church  seems  to  show  that  the  Roman  genius  for  organisation 
is  already  crystallising  into  conceptions  of  hierarchy. 

Even  more  interesting  is  the  book  of  the  peasant  or 
"  Yeoman  "  Hermas,  which  was  finished  about  a.d.  140.  The 
"  Shepherd  of  Hermas  "  has  been  called  "  The  great  examination 
of  the  conscience  of  the  Roman  Church,"  and  the  title  is  the 
more  significant  when  we  remember  the  simple  piety  of  the 
author  and  the  sincerity  with  which  he  makes  his  enquiry.  The 
fcheme  of  the  book  is  penitence,  but  the  main  interest  rests  in 
the  detail  in  which  the  conditions  of  sinners  enlighten  us  as  to 
the  early  Christian  community.  The  chief  defect  arraigned  is 
the  frequency  of  apostasy,  which  is  hardly  surprising  when  one 
reflects  how  rapidly  converts  were  swept  in,  and  how  fiercely  the 
storms  of  persecution  beat  against  their  untried  faith.  The 
Shepherd  of  Hermas  is  an  admonition  rather  than  an  apology, 
and  yet  the  picture  it  gives  of  the  community  of  Christian 
Rome  is  on  the  whole  surprisingly  felicitous.  We  feel  that  it 
is  a  society  which  is  defective  but  very  sincere,  that  the  very 
severity  with  which  its  shortcomings  are  denounced  testifies  to 
the  purity  of  its  ideal.  The  quarrels  among  the  clergy  were 
deplored  just  because  they  were  true  Shepherds  ;  apostasy  was 
common,  but  Christian  heroism  was  the  rule. 

The  admonitions  of  Hermas  were  well-timed,  for  a  stronger 
enemy  was  at  hand.  In  the  middle  of  the  second  century, 
heresy  first  made  its  appearance  in  Rome  in  the  form  of 
Marcionism,  against  which  Justin  Martyr  spent  his  energy  in 
waging  war.  Thus  already  by  the  third  century  Rome  is  regarded 
as  the  gravitating-point  for  aggressive  heresiarchs  :  she  alone 
must  arbitrate  even  as  she  alone  can  define  the  truth. 

The  spiritual  prestige  of  the  Eternal  City  grew  apace 
throughout  the  second  century.  St.  Ignatius  refers  to  her  as 
"she  who  hath  presidency  in  the  place  of  the  region  of  the 
Romans,"  and  the  context,  while  omitting  all  mention  of  the 
Episcopal  office,  ascribes  the  ascendancy  to  a  kind  of  social 
and  municipal  priority  which  the  Roman  Church  naturally 
borrowed  from  the  political  autocracy  of  the  city.  The  so-called 
Clementina  erected  for  her  the  fictionary  tradition  of  orthodox 
championship  through  the  legend  of  St.  Peter  and  Simon  Magus, 


6  A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

and  henceforth  vague  petrarchal  legends  are  interwoven  with 
well-defined  tradition  as  instruments  of  aggressive  warfare 
against  the  spiritual  foes  of  the  Roman  Bishop. 

The  story  of  Christianity  in  the  third  century  has  two  main 
characteristics,  and  each  of  these  has  its  bearing  on  the  develop- 
ment of  the  Papacy. 

We  are  confronted,  on  the  one  hand,  with  the  phenomenon  of 
heresy,  which  grew  apace  in  the  uncertain  soil  of  the  primitive 
Church ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  we  stand  face  to  face  with  the 
splendid  drama  of  Christian  heroism  which  the  age  of  persecu- 
tion presents. 

The  first  of  these  two  forces,  the  growth  of  heresy,  has 
indeed  a  negative  importance  which  outweighs  its  positive 
influence  on  the  Roman  Church.  It  was  mainly  because  Rome 
was  80  little  affected  by  the  various  waves  of  fantastic  specula- 
tion which  swept  the  whole  of  Christendom  during  this  period 
that  the  Apostolic  See  was  enabled  to  lay  its  foundations  so 
steadily  and  unobtrusively  in  the  formative  age  of  ecclesiastical 
history.  The  contrast  between  East  and  West  in  this  connection 
has  often  been  dwelt  upon,  and  indeed,  it  is  said,  with  perhaps 
undue  emphasis.  But  it  would  be  hard  to  deny  the  truth,  or  to 
exaggerate  the  importance  of  the  distinction  which  eternally 
separates  the  practical  genius  of  the  methodical  West  from  the 
mystical  dreaminess  of  the  Oriental  mind.  At  the  same  time,  it 
was  not  in  vain  that  heresiarchs  flocked  to  Rome  for  a  hearing, 
and  as  early  as  a.d.  130  the  Marcionite  sect  had  planted  the  first 
alien  seed  in  the  virgin  soil  of  the  Roman  Church.  But  the 
attitude  of  the  sainted  Polycarp,  when,  as  a  visitor  in  Rome, 
he  was  confronted  with  Marcion,  is  typical  of  the  stainless 
orthodoxy  which  always  characterised  the  majority  of  Roman 
Christians.  "Knowest  thou  me?"  asked  the  heretic.  "Yea,  I 
recognise  the  first-born  of  Satan,"  answered  the  martyr,  and 
St.  Justin  instantly  took  up  the  cudgels  for  the  Church,  which 
never  lacked  a  champion  when  her  truths  were  menaced  by  the 
onset  of  fanaticism. 

Marcionism  was  but  the  first  of  a  long  series  of  weary 
internal  struggles  which  left  their  influence  on  the  Roman 
Church,  although  none  were  indigenous  in  their  growth.  Still 
more  influential  was  the  hold  which  Montanism  gained  over  the 
Roman  people,  attracting  converts,  as  is  so  often  the  case,  by 
the  very  repulsiveness  of  its  severity  and  gloom.  The  chief 
Roman  opponent  of  Montanism  was  Hippolytus,  the  prototype 
of  Luther  and  the  patron  saint  of  heretics,  who  is  in  some  ways 
the   most  remarkable   figure   of    the    period.      He    is    chiefly 


THE  ORIGIN  OF  SPIRITUAL  POWER  7 

aesociated  with  the  greater  struggle  to  which  Montanism  gave 
place — that  of  Monarchianism,  or  Patripassionism.     This  con- 
test, which  lasted  through  three  pontificates,  originated  in  the 
attempt   of  one   Praxeas   to   harmonise  Christianity   with  the 
spirit  of  Hellenism.     But  the  subtleties  involved  in  the  delicate 
conception  of  the  Logos  were  altogether  too  much  for  the  Roman 
mind,  untrained  as  it  was  in  metaphysical  abstractions.     Three 
successive  Popes  were  bewildered  and  harassed  by  the  conten- 
tion ;  each  took  refuge  in  a  different  line  of  policy,  and  all  were 
equally   unsuccessful   in   effecting  a   conclusion.     Pope  Victor 
contented  himself  with  condemning  Sabellius,  who  had  unwisely 
ventured  to  mediate,  and  thus  made  himself  the  scapegoat  of 
both  the  opposing  parties.     Zephyrinus,  Victor's  successor,  is  the 
first  Pope  of  whose  personality  we  have  any  real  hint  in  the 
somewhat   colourless  annals  of  the  time.     He  seems  to  have 
been  a  vacillating  person  of  inferior  intellect,  dominated  by  the 
stronger  mental   capacities   of  his  major-domo   and  successor, 
Callixtus.      Zephyrinus    reigned    for    nineteen    years    without 
making  up  his  mind  in  any  one  consistent  direction  on  the 
great   doctrinal   controversy.      At    one    moment   he    identifies 
himself  with    the   "  Patripassions " ;    at   another    he    publicly 
retracts  his   self-committal.     Throughout    he  was   consistently 
opposed  by  the  relentless  logic  of  Hippolytus — the  one  man  who 
had  the  courage  to  face  the  problem  whose  intricacies  paralysed 
the  whole  of  Western  Christendom.     Branded  by  the  title  of 
Ditheist,  and  goaded  into  schism  by  the  inconsistencies  of  the 
Pope,  Hippolytus  cut  himself  off  from  the  orthodox  Church  just 
at  the  moment  when  Callixtus  was  elected  to  succeed  his  patron 
as  Bishop  of  Rome.     If  the  attack  of  Hippolytus  on  Zephyrinus 
reveals  the  contempt  of  the  zealot  for  the  nonentity — of  intel- 
lectual vigour  for  mental  lethargy — in  his  indictment  of  Callixtus 
a  deeper  personal  rancour  can  be  traced,  in  which  the  indigna- 
tion  of  the   intrepid   heretic   is  stirred   against  the   dishonest 
subterfuges   of    the   unworthy   champion   of    orthodoxy.      Not 
content   with   exposing   the    inconsistency    of    the    impossible 
doctrinal   compromise   put   forward   by   Callixtus,  he   writes  a 
polemic  against  his  not  invulnerable  career,  ending  in  a  vigorous 
attack   on   his   indulgence   towards   offending   brethren.     It   is 
remarkable  that  the  first  great  antipope  should  also  be  in  a 
sense    the    father   of    papal    history.      His    chronicle,    written 
apparently  in  the  year  235,  became  the  skeleton  of  the  famous 
"Liber  Poniificalis,"  whose  many  editions  form  the  chief  sources 
of  early  papal  chronology. 

The  great  Monarchian  controversy  was  brought  to  an  abrupt 


8  A  SHOKT  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

conclusion  by  the  persecution  of  Maximinian.  By  the  third 
century,  it  is  important  to  notice  that  a  definite  policy  towards 
Christianity  was  a  necessary  part  of  the  political  programme  of 
the  Emperors.  The  tempered  hostility  of  Marcus  Aurelius, 
based  on  the  antithesis  between  stoicism  and  enthusiasm,  paled 
before  the  dissolute  ardour  of  his  successors.  But  the  persecu- 
tions of  the  third  century  were  produced  rather  by  sudden 
flashes  of  imperial  caprice  and  intolerance  than  by  a  settled 
resentment  and  suspicion,  such  as  underlay  the  earlier  outbursts 
of  hostility.  Not  only  was  the  time  past  when  Christianity 
could  be  ignored,  but  the  moment  had  come  when  resistance  to 
its  gathering  tide  had  broken  down.  Persecution  had  given  it  a 
history,  and  the  failure  of  the  State  to  extinguish  it  had  but 
vindicated  its  claim  to  exist  as  an  integral  part  of  the  Roman 
system.  Rome  dared  no  longer  to  oppose  a  force  which  she 
could  not  control,  and  by  a  sudden  change  of  front  she  adopted 
into  her  favour  the  society  which  she  had  failed  to  extinguish. 
Hereafter  she  was  to  renew  her  own  youth  in  the  young  life  of 
a  community  deriving  its  vitality  from  the  power  of  a  doctrine 
in  which  strange  and  familiar  ideas  seemed  to  be  startlingly 
blended. 


CHAPTER  II 

THE  CONVERSION  OF  CONSTANTINE  AND  ITS  EFFECTS, 

A.D.  312-403 

IN  the  year  312,  the  religion  of  the  Pope  became  the  reUgion 
of  the  Emperor.  The  scene  on  the  Campagna,  which  has 
been  variously  regarded  as  the  cause,  the  symbol,  or  the 
pretext  of  the  conversion  of  Constantino,  was  not  merely  a 
dramatic  finale  to  the  era  of  persecution.  It  marks  in  a  real 
sense  the  first  great  political  revolution  of  papal  history.  The 
vision  of  the  flaming  Cross  which  gave  to  Constantino  his  empire, 
gave  also  to  the  Papacy  the  standard  of  mediaeval  Christendom. 

The  third  century  had  not  after  all  done  more  than  make  it 
possible  for  a  strong  Bishop  to  assert  his  own  individuality,  and 
impart  something  of  his  personal  prestige  to  the  dignity  of  his 
ofiBce.  But  the  Bishop  of  Rome  as  the  High  Priest  of  the  State 
religion,  the  "  accredited  functionary  "  of  imperial  ceremonies,  is 
a  totally  difi'erent  person  from  the  uninfluential  leader  of  an 
obscure  sect  which  is  persecuted  or  tolerated  according  to  the 
deviating  policy  of  the  Emperor  of  the  moment. 

It  may  be  true  that  Constantino  was  "  great "  in  his  achieve- 
ments rather  than  his  character,  and  certainly  it  is  hard  to 
reconcile  what  we  know  of  his  personal  life  with  anything 
approaching  to  the  Christian  ideal.  But  the  edict  of  Milan, 
which  constitutes  the  charter  of  endowment  of  Western  Christ- 
ianity, is  the  work  of  a  strong  man  who  does  not  shrink  from 
giving  the  boldest  expression  to  his  convictions — whether 
political  or  religious,  or  both — in  terms  of  uncompromising 
definition.  Nothing  better  illustrates  the  importance  which  was 
attached  to  Constantino's  relationship  to  the  Papacy  than  the 
legend  of  his  baptism  by  Pope  Silvester,  and  the  myth  of  the 
Donation  which  was  built  up  on  it,  and  embodied  in  the 
celebrated  forgery  of  the  eighth  century.  The  legend  exaggerates 
his  zeal  for  the  faith  of  his  adoption  while  it  depreciates  his 
statesmanship,  and  gives  rise  to  the  poet's  invective — 

9 


10  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

Of  how  much  ill  was  cause 
Not  thy  conversion,  but  those  rich  domains 
That  the  first  wealthy  Pope  received  of  thee. 

The  fictionary  grant  was  founded  on  the  authentic  edict  by 
which  Constantine  endowed  the  Roman  See  with  the  .right  of 
holding  property  and  receiving  it  by  bequest,  and  thus  laid  the 
foundations  of  temporal  power. 

So  far  the  work  of  Constantine  in  augmenting  the  papal 
power  was  but  the  consequence  of  his  partial,  or  at  least  formal 
conversion,  but  his  career  has  a  still  wider  significance  in  the 
early  development  of  the  Papacy.  When  the  Emperor  adopted 
the  religion  of  the  Pope  and  raised  him  to  pre-eminence  in  the 
imperial  city,  no  one  dreamed  that  Constantine  was  adopting 
Silvester  as  heir  to  his  prerogative  in  the  world's  capital.  And 
yet  for  posterity  it  has  this  meaning.  The  foundation  of  new 
Rome  in  330  was  a  heavy  blow  to  the  prestige  of  the  Mother  City, 
and  the  domination  which  the  Bishop  instantly  assumed  was  a 
remarkable  concurrence  of  the  expedient  and  the  inevitable. 
Bereft  of  the  sacred  presence  of  a  Csesar  who  had  lost  interest 
in  its  welfare,  the  capital  of  the  empire  must  have  fallen  a  prey 
to  invasion  from  without,  or  sedition  from  within,  while  such 
Byzantine  influences  as  would  have  penetrated  its  walls  from  the 
nominal  seat  of  government,  would  sap  its  vigour  and  saturate  it 
with  Oriental  apathy.  That  such  a  state  of  things  was  avoided 
was  due  solely  and  entirely  to  the  rise  of  the  Papacy.  It  was  to 
her  Bishop  that  the  city  turned  in  her  bereavement  for  con- 
solation ;  to  him  she  looked  for  a  new  insignia  and  a  new  raison 
d'itre,  and  in  his  religion  she  sought  another  tradition  to  replace 
the  majesty  of  imperial  presence  which  had  been  rudely  wrested 
from  her  crown.  That  the  Popes  were  ready,  and  more  than 
ready,  to  accept  the  burden  of  sovereignty,  and  to  take  up  the 
sceptre  which  lay  at  their  feet,  must  be  accepted  as  a  sign 
of  their  political  energy  rather  than  regretted  as  a  stigma  of 
worldliness.  Everything  pointed  to  the  legitimacy  of  such 
authority,  and  there  was  as  yet  no  hint  of  that  dualism  between 
Church  and  State  which  seems  to  us  in  the  light  of  subsequent 
history  so  inevitable.  After  all,  the  High  Priest  of  the  Hebraic 
tradition  and  the  Pontifex  Maximus  of  the  Romans  themselves 
had  never  been  called  upon  to  apologise  for  their  plenipotentiary 
powers,  and  it  would  be  unreasonable  to  expect  political  thought 
of  the  fourth  century  to  grasp  a  distinction  which  the  last 
epoch  of  the  Middle  Ages  was  unable  to  formulate. 

The  actual  history  of  the  Papacy  in  the  fourth  century  is 
soon  told,  for  the  atmosphere  is  still  very  obscure,  and  what  we 


THE  CONVERSION  OF  CONSTANTINE  11 

know  about  the  Popes  themselves  bears  a  very  slight  proportion 
to  the  extent  of  their  importance. 

The  first  characteristic  which  marks  the  papal  policy  is  the 
completeness  of  the  separation  between  East  and  West.  This  is 
illustrated  in  a  remarkable  degree  by  the  attitude  of  the  Popes 
towards  the  great  Trinitarian  controversy  which  monopolised  the 
energy  of  Eastern  Christendom  throughout  the  first  half  of  the 
fourth  century.  In  the  early  period  of  the  strife,  the  attitude  of 
Rome  is  distinctly  lukewarm ;  Silvester  stands  aloof  from  the 
conflict,  and  his  counsels  are  all  for  peace.  He  is  represented  at 
Nicsea  by  two  presbyters,  who  take  very  little  part  in  the 
proceedings,  while  he  himself  rigidly  maintains  an  attitude  of 
dignified  aloofness  which  probably  proceeded  as  much  from  lack 
of  interest  as  from  the  instinct  of  caution.  It  seemed  to  the  West- 
ern mind,  as  it  at  first  appeared  to  Constantino  himself,  vague, 
unreal,  and  wordy — the  argument  turned  on  a  metaphysical 
distinction  expressed  in  terms  of  Oriental  abstraction.  But  just 
as  Constantino  himself  became  convinced  when  deeper  issues 
showed  themselves,  so  the  Pope  found  his  defences  giving  way 
when  the  second  phase  of  the  struggle  brought  him  face  to  face 
with  the  practical  consequences  of  the  schism. 

In  340,  the  great  champion  of  orthodoxy  was  for  a  second 
time  banished  from  his  See  by  Constantius,  the  most  dissolute  of 
Constantino's  unworthy  successors.  Athanasius,  understanding 
that  the  next  move  in  the  Arian  programme  was  to  win  over 
the  Pope,  instantly  withdrew  to  Rome.  The  extraordinary 
fascination  of  the  "puny  little  man  "  with  the  great  soul,  whose 
sweetness  of  character  blended  so  felicitously  with  the  strength 
of  his  convictions,  no  doubt  gave  him  a  natural  power  of  success 
as  an  evangelist,  and  for  two  years  he  taught  the  Romans  what 
was  really  involved  in  the  great  central  doctrine  of  Christianity, 
till  all  vestiges  of  suspicion  of  "  Orientalism  "  was  dispelled  from 
their  minds  and  from  that  of  Pope  Julius  himself.  But  probably 
more  efi"ective  than  any  dialectic  victory  with  the  people  of 
Rome  was  the  argument  of  experience  which  the  Eastern 
situation  afi'orded.  Athanasius  might  plead  for  the  purity  of 
Christian  doctrine  with  the  eloquence  born  of  unswerving  faith, 
he  might  appeal  to  the  orthodox  tradition  which  the  past  had 
already  associated  with  Christian  Rome  ;  but  he  had  only  to  turn 
the  eyes  of  his  hearers  over  the  sea  to  Alexandria  and  Anfcioch, 
where  pagans  and  Arians  were  united  in  persecution  and 
sacrilege,  and  the  practical  mind  of  Rome  would  not  be  slow  to 
recognise  the  significance  of  such  an  alliance.  In  342,  Julius 
declared  Athanasius  to  be  innocent  and  his  doctrine  orthodox, 


12  A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

and  a  little  later,  he  summoned  a  Council  at  Sardica  to  give 
universal  expression  to  the  same  verdict.  But  the  Arian 
Bishops  were  not  prepared  for  an  oecumenical  settlement  of  this 
kind,  and  at  the  last  moment  they  withdrew  under  a  pretext  of 
recall,  setting  up  a  hostile  assembly  at  Philippopolis.  At  a 
confirmatory  Council  at  Milan,  the  Western  Church,  under  the 
auspices  of  Pope  and  Emperor,  formally  registered  its  orthodoxy, 
and  thus  ratified  the  breach  between  East  and  West  which 
Sardica  had  disclosed.  The  first  phase  of  Roman  intervention 
closes  here,  and  the  second  is  less  creditable  to  the  Holy  See. 
In  352,  Julius  was  succeeded  by  Liberius,  who  inherited  from 
his  predecessor  his  zealous  championship  of  Athanasius  and  his 
cause.  But  conditions  became  more  complicated  owing  to  the 
death  of  the  orthodox  Constans,  leaving  Constantius  in  353  sole 
Emperor  of  new  and  old  Rome.  In  355,  a  Council  was  sum- 
moned to  Milan  by  the  Emperor  to  lodge  fresh  charges  against 
Athanasius  and  secure  his  condemnation  in  the  West.  But  the 
Church  of  the  West  justified  its  independence,  and  Constantius, 
behind  the  arras,  heard  himself  denounced  in  terms  which 
dumbiounded  his  Eastern  followers.  An  imperial  fulmination 
followed,  against  which  the  Church  had  as  yet  no  valid  weapons 
to  employ.  So  three  Bishops  were  immediately  driven  into 
banishment,  and  after  an  interval  in  which  to  reconsider  his 
position,  Liberius  followed  them,  full  of  venerable  courage  and 
noble  intention.  .But  two  years  of  the  misery  of  exile  broke  the 
old  man's  spirit,  which  had  at  first  soared  high  among  the  ideals 
of  Athanasius  and  led  him  to  refuse  gifts  sent  by  his  imperial 
antagonist  in  words  of  haughty  disdain.  "  You  have  desolated 
the  Churches  of  Christendom,"  he  said  to  the  eunuch  who 
brought  him  the  gold  of  Constantius,  "and  then  you  offer  me 
alms  as  a  convict.     Go,  first  learn  to  be  a  Christian." 

The  persecution  of  Liberius  is  a  striking  instance  of  the  hold 
which  the  papal  idea  had  already  won  among  the  Romans. 
Liberius  might  acquiesce  in  the  imperial  decree  of  banishment, 
and  might  choose,  if  he  pleased,  to  try  the  road  of  martyrdom, 
but  the  sheep  of  his  flock  were  unprepared  to  follow  his  docility. 
Hence,  an  attempt  of  Constantius  to  create  schism  by  the 
election  of  an  anti-pope  in  356  was  foredoomed  to  disaster.  The 
imperial  nommee,  elected,  it  is  said,  by  three  eunuchs,  was  of 
course  an  Arian,  but  the  opposition  of  Rome  was  less  a  matter 
of  orthodoxy  than  of  personal  loyalty  to  the  legitimate  Bishop. 

A  deputation  of  patrician  women  undertook  the  task  which 
their  husbands  had  been  reluctant  to  attempt,  and  success- 
fully  carried  it  through,  winning  the  provisional   consent  of 


THE  CONVEESION  OF  CONSTANTINE  13 

Constantius  to  the  return  of  Liberius.  Unfortunately  for  his 
historical  reputation,  Liberius  proved  all  too  compliant,  and  as 
the  condition  of  his  return  consented  to  sign  the  semi-Arian 
creed  of  Sirmium.  His  entry  into  Rome  was  a  triumphal  page- 
ant, which  too  soon  developed  into  a  faction  fight.  A  riot  in  the 
amphitheatre,  accompanied  by  the  cry  of  the  populace  for  "  One 
God,  one  Pope  ! "  led  to  the  expulsion  of  the  anti-Pope  Felix  and 
the  termination  of  the  first  schism  of  papal  history. 

The  seeds  of  schism,  once  sown,  were  however  never  far  from 
the  surface  of  the  soil,  and  the  rivalry  between  Liberius  and 
Felix  broke  out  again  in  358,  on  the  death  of  the  Apostate 
Bishop,  in  a  disputed  election.  The  two  candidates,  Damasus 
and  Ursicinus,  seem  to  have  represented  in  some  measure  the 
rival  principles  of  Arianism  and  orthodoxy,  but  the  heresy  in 
this  phase  was  rather  a  pretext  for  schism  than  a  genuine  cause 
of  disunion.  At  any  rate,  the  rival  candidates  are  both 
arraigned  with  equal  severity  by  the  impartial  judgment  of  their 
contemporary,  Ammianus,  who  anathematises  them  as  authors 
of  tumult  and  their  followers  as  disturbers  of  the  peace.  The 
same  writer  gives  a  depressing  account  of  the  luxury  and  licence 
which  accompanied  the  growth  of  papal  power  at  this  time,  and 
his  words  are  more  than  confirmed  by  the  witness  of  his  greater 
contemporary,  St.  Jerome,  whose  denunciations  have  all  the 
added  force  which  internal  evidence  can  supply.  It  is  needless 
to  recapitulate  the  indictment  of  the  great  ascetic,  or  to  para- 
phrase his  rhetoric  :  his  writings  are  classics  of  Christianity,  and 
the  charges  which  he  brings  against  Christian  Rome  are  just 
what  we  should  expect.  Ancient  Rome  was  dying  fast — its 
institutions,  its  morals,  and  its  social  conditions  were  moribund, 
and  it  is  not  surprising  that  the  great  instrument  of  its 
regeneration  should  be  itself  infected  by  the  symptoms  of  decay. 
But  the  vicious  tendencies  which  inevitably  crept  into  the  body 
politic  of  the  Church  were  not  without  their  antidote,  and  the 
success  of  Damasus  in  defeating  his  rival  Ursicinus,  however 
incomplete  in  itself,  was  a  distinct  triumph  for  the  reform  party. 
What  history  knows  of  Damasus  does  not  reveal  an  attractive 
personality,  but  he  is  to  a  great  extent  overshadowed  by  the 
more  striking  figure  of  his  secretary,  whose  principles  he  seems 
to  have  shared.  The  force  upon  which  Jerome  relied  to 
counteract  the  spirit  of  decadence  was  that  of  monasticism, 
which  had  already  been  communicated  to  the  West  by  the 
preaching  of  Athanasius.  The  primitive  monastic  ideal  of 
Jerome  had  little  in  common  with  the  attractive  simplicity  of 
the  rule  of  St.  Benedict  and  St.  Bernard.     It  was  rugged,  crude. 


14  A  SHOBT  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

and  exotic — often  perverted  by  fanatics  of  the  type  of  Simon  of 
the  pillar,  and  seldom  entirely  free  from  excessive  exaggeration. 
And  yet  none  but  the  most  unimaginative  can  fail  to  recognise 
the  inspiration  which  underlay  the  austerity  of  Jerome  and  his 
followers,  or  to  detect  the  hidden  beauty  of  the  truth,  trans- 
cending the  repulsive  forms  which  embody  it.  The  spirit  of  the 
movement  was  reactionary,  and  reaction  is  seldom  untainted 
with  hysteria :  its  form  was  premature,  and  consequently  mis- 
understood. These  two  characteristics  account  for  the  failure  of 
Jerome  to  attain  what  was  evidently  his  object — the  succession 
to  the  Papacy.  A  young  patrician  girl  had  killed  herself  by 
excessive  asceticism  under  his  spiritual  supervision,  and  a 
storm  of  indignation  broke  out  against  him.  He  had  declared 
the  "  inner  world  of  moral  freedom  "  to  be  the  only  refuge  from 
the  powers  of  decadence,  and  his  adherents  parodied  his  words 
by  excesses  of  fanaticism,  while  his  opponents  saw  that  the 
perversion  of  his  teaching  was  sapping  the  strength  of  the 
State  life.  It  is,  therefore,  less  surprising  that  Jerome  was  not 
elected  to  the  Papacy  in  384  than  that  he  should  have  regarded 
his  own  prospects  as  favourable.  Had  he  attained  to  this,  his 
avowed  ambition,  it  is  probable  that  his  reputation  in  the  mind 
of  Christendom  would  have  suffered.  It  is  doubtful  whether 
the  great  Father  had  in  him  the  makings  of  a  great  Pope,  and  it 
is  certain  that  the  honour  which  he  might  have  reaped  as  Pope 
could  not  have  surpassed  the  homage  which  the  Church  has 
always  yielded  to-  the  author  of  the  "  Vulgate  ". 

So,  probably,  it  was  a  good  thing,  both  for  Rome  and  for 
Christendom,  that  the  exaggerated  ardour  of  Jerome  should  be 
defeated  by  the  mediocrity  of  Siricius.  This  pontificate  is,  how- 
ever, important  in  one  respect,  for  Siricius  inaugurated  the  legal 
supremacy  of  the  Papacy  by  the  issue  of  the  first  Decretal. 
There  is  nothing  tentative  in  the  tone  in  which  the  Bishop  of 
Rome  addresses  the  Bishop  of  Tarragona  in  this  document.  He 
defines  and  lays  down  the  law  with  a  certainty  of  precision  which 
leaves  no  room  for  doubt  that  what  is  received  at  Rome  will  be 
acceptable  to  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth.  Thus  the  first 
papal  edict  declared  the  Church's  mind  on  subjects  of  the  most 
vital  importance,  and  no  one  saw  what  was  implied  in  the  passive 
acquiescence  which  greeted  it.  No  Hilary  of  Aries  raised  his 
voice  in  protest,  and  no  Luther  was  at  hand  to  save  the  situation 
in  its  initial  stages,  before  long  centuries  of  petty  strife  had 
made  the  Reformation  crisis  inevitable. 

By  the  close  of  the  fourth  century  the  early  Papacy  had 
begun  that  quiet  ascendant  course  which  was  to  reach  its  zenith 


THE  CONVEKSION  OF  CONSTANTINE  15 

in  Hildebrand.  Founded  on  the  petrarchal  tradition,  and 
supported  by  the  ''magic  of  the  name  of  Rome,"  the  upward 
course  was  clear.  All  that  was  needed  was  a  series  of  great  men 
capable  of  piloting  it  aright,  and  of  these  the  dawn  of  the  fifth 
century  saw  the  forerunner  in  the  first  Innocent. 


CHAPTER  III 

THE  FALL  OF  ROME  TO  THE  COUNCIL  OF  EPHESUS, 
A.D.  403-431 

THE  fall  of  Rome  and  the  events  leading  up  to  it  naay 
seem  to  have  little  to  do  with  the  growth  of  the  early 
Papacy,  which  is  in  its  essence  organic,  and  more  or 
less  independent  of  external  conditions.  At  the  same  time,  the 
identity  between  the  Eternal  and  the  Holy  See  was  by  this  time 
closely  established,  and  it  would  be  hardly  credible  to  suppose 
that  the  political  crisis,  at  which  the  whole  world  stood  aghast, 
should  leave  unmoved  the  spiritual  institution  which  it  most 
nearly  affected. 

It  was  the  ghost  of  Rome  which  Alaric  went  forth  to  attack — 
the  phantom  which  haunted  the  Forum  and  the  Palatine  Hill, 
which  held  the  world  in  awe,  and  survived  both  the  ravages  of 
the  invader  and  the  undermining  of  internal  decay.  The  genius 
and  the  good  fortune  of  the  pioneers  of  papal  power  had 
established  its  alliance  with  the  invincible  wraith,  and  assured 
the  road  to  success.  The  reaction  of  the  idea  of  Rome  on 
the  idea  of  Catholic  supremacy  had  already  begun  to  work,  and 
it  remained  for  the  fifth  century  to  supply  a  succession  of  able 
Popes  qualified  to  pilot  the  papal  fortunes  through  the  laby- 
rinths of  political  confusion  which  afi'orded  alike  their  danger 
and  their  opportunity. 

According  to  Jerome,  Innocent  was  the  son  of  his  pre- 
decessor AnastasiuB,  and  the  origin  seems  a  likely  one,  for  he 
mounted  the  papal  throne  with  no  uncertain  step.  We  find  in 
him  the  first  vestiges  of  a  definite  conception  of  spiritual 
supremacy,  and  in  his  dealings  with  the  rest  of  Christendom  we 
seem  to  trace  the  workings  of  a  fully-developed  theory  of  papal 
autocracy.  Such  a  theory  had  been  made  possible  by  the 
achievements  of  the  fourth  century  Popes,  and  above  all  by  the 
supposed  origin  of  appeals  at  the  Council  of  Sardica.  It  seems 
likely  that  the  appeal  of  the  Bishop  of  Illyricum  to  Pope  Julius 
on  that  occasion  was  nothing  more  than  a  request  for  arbitration, 

16 


FALL  OF  KOME  TO  THE  COUNCIL  OF  EPHESUS  17 

but  the  decree  of  the  Emperor  Valentinian  II.  in  381  put  it  to 
the  dangerous  use  of  a  precedent,  and  established  by  law  the 
claim  which  as  yet  the  Popes  had  hardly  ventured  to  formulate. 
At  a  time  when  the  Empire  itself  was  stricken  with  the 
paralysis  of  fear  and  the  apathy  of  decay,  an  imperial  edict  was 
still  a  weapon  to  conjure  with,  and  from  the  first  Innocent 
grasped  it  with  all  the  skill  of  an  ambitious  adventurer.  At  one 
moment  he  generalises  with  convenient  vagueness,  and  at  another 
he  asserts  and  defines  with  intrepid  precision.  He  brandishes  it 
in  the  face  of  the  Bishops  of  Rouen  and  Toulouse,  while  he 
hides  it  under  a  cloak  of  compromise  in  dealing  with  the  more 
independent  Churches  of  Macedonia  and  Africa.  By  a  happy 
coincidence  of  spiritual  discernment  and  worldly  discretion,  he 
was  able  to  espouse  the  cause  of  Christendom,  the  "Golden 
Mouth"  against  Theophilus,  and  thus  to  justify  his  claim  to 
appellate  jurisdiction  by  his  competent  discrimination. 

Even  in  Rome,  however,  the  power  of  the  law  paled  for  a 
moment  before  the  political  crisis,  and  Innocent's  clever  manipu- 
lation of  precedent   falls   into  insignificance  beside  the  states- 
manlike activity  which  could  turn  the  calamity  of  Rome  to  the 
gain  of  the  Papacy.     His  priority  in  the  city  had  gained  a  new 
security  from  the  failure  of  the  imperial  experiment  of  residing 
in   Rome,   "v^hich    Honorius    had    attempted   in   403.      Roman 
patriotism— eS'ete  as  it  was — survived  in  an  intense  longing  of 
the  Roman  people  for  then:  Caesar's  return,  and  an  impatient 
weariness  of  the  imperial  boast  that  "Where   the  Emperor  is, 
there  is  Rome  ".     The  young  Honorius  consequently  yielded  to 
their  entreaty,  only  to  inflict  on  their  feelings  a  deeper  wound  by 
the  failure  of  the  experiment.     All  the  resources  of  a  worn-out 
pageantry  were  called  forth  after  a  hundred  years  of  disuse,  and 
on  the  Milvian  Bridge,  the  Roman  people  with  Innocent  and  his 
clergy   at   their  head,  welcomed  the  triumphant  youth  in  his 
chariot  with  his   father-in-law,  the   hero   Stilicho,   beside  him. 
But  the  dilapidated  splendour  of  the  Palatine  Hill  oppressed 
Honorius,  and  he  was  frankly  bored  with  the  shabby  magnificence 
which  was  the  best  that  old  Rome  could  afford  in  his  honour. 
"  It  seemed  as  if  affrighted  Rome  had  decked  herself  as  a  bride 
to  meet  her  long-expected  wooer,  but  the  bride  was  old  and  the 
wooer  feeble."    With  ill-disguised  relief,  Honorius  seized  the  first 
pretext  which  the  Gothic  war  afforded  to  leave  the  city  that 
had  yearned  over  him  with  pathetic  solicitude.     From  the  sunlit 
plains  of  Ravenna,  he  watched  Stilicho  complete  his  cycle  of 
victories  by  the  defeat  of  Rhadagaisus  the  Goth,  and  the  relief 
of   Florence,   and   connived  at  the  plots  which   were   already 
2 


18  A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

gathering  thick  about  the  hero's  path.  Stilicho  fell  in  408,  a 
victim  to  the  fate  which  is  typical  of  the  defenders  of  Italy,  and 
his  execution  removed  the  last  obstacle  which  stood  between  the 
barbarian  conqueror  and  Rome.  Urged  on  by  the  restless 
"  demon  "  of  his  ambition  and  encouraged  by  the  superstitious 
terror  of  his  opponents,  Alaric,  "the  scourge  of  God,"  pressed  on 
to  the  walls  of  Rome.  Men  watched  his  progress  with  the 
fascination  of  fear,  reminding  themselves  of  Sibylline  prophecy 
and  apocalyptic  prediction  of  anti-Christ,  while  the  poem  of 
Claudian  has  in  its  appeal  all  the  pathos  of  a  dirge.  "  Arise,  0 
venerable  Mother!  Free  thyself  from  the  ignoble  fears  of  old 
age !  0  city,  coeval  with  the  earth.  When  the  Don  shall  water 
the  plains  of  Egypt,  and  the  Nile  the  Mceotian  marshes,  then 
only  shall  iron  Lachesis  lay  on  thee  her  doom ! " 

But  the  doom  was  one  which  neither  the  passion  of  the  poet, 
nor  the  spell  of  the  city's  majestic  charm,  nor  the  appeal  of  Pope 
Innocent  could  avert,  for  it  was  written  far  back  in  the  pages  of 
the  past  and  carried  in  its  train  all  the  earnests  of  future  promise. 
From  the  darkness  which  settles  over  the  condemned  city,  the 
faint  light  of  coming  dawn  is  never  entirely  absent,  and  the  grim 
details  of  the  three  sieges  lose  some  of  their  tragic  significance 
when  we  regard  them  as  the  birth-pangs  of  a  new  era,  or  the 
wounds  inevitable  to  the  sudden  sharp  collision  between  the 
ancient  and  the  modern  world. 

The  sack  of  Rome  was  no  mere  display  of  barbaric  audacity  ; 
the  humiliation  of  the  city  was  complete,  and  the  life-work  of 
Alaric  was  deliberately  carried  out  in  keeping  with  the  fanatical 
spirit  in  which  it  was  conceived.  The  horror  of  Europe  as 
expressed  by  St.  Jerome  was  unfeigned — "With  one  city  the 
whole  world  had  perished.  .  .  .  My  voice  is  choked,  and  my 
sobs  interrupt  the  words  which  I  write;  the  city  is  subdued 
which  subdued  the  world." 

And  yet,  the  collapse  of  pagan  Rome,  so  bitterly  lamented  by 
the  great  Christian  father,  not  only  revealed  the  hidden  strength 
of  the  Christian  community,  but  in  a  real  sense  augmented  its 
power.  The  Goths,  though  Arians,  did  not  carry  doctrinal 
controversy  into  political  warfare,  and  with  a  spirit  of  toleration 
from  which  later  ages  have  much  to  learn,  Alaric  spared  Christian 
churches  from  pillage  and  Christian  virgins  from  violation. 
Nor  was  this  the  only  advantage  reaped  by  the  Church  in  Rome. 
The  withdrawal  of  the  Goths  in  412  was  followed  by  the 
gradual  return  of  the  scattered  Romans  to  their  city,  but  they 
were  no  longer  as  sheep  not  having  a  shepherd.  In  the  place  of 
the  absentee  Emperor  with  his  incompetent  bureaucracy  stood  one 


FALL  OF  KOME  TO  THE  COUNCIL  OF  EPHESUS  19 

who  called  himself  their  father;  whose  oflScial  claim  combined 
the  mystical  element  which  the  imperial  idea  had  fostered  with 
the  spirit  of  practical  and  efficient  leadership,  so  long  invoked  in 
vain. 

Pope  Innocent  was  absent  during  the  siege  on  an  embassy 
to  Honorius,  and  thus  in  his  very  person  stood  aloof  from  the 
horrors  of  the  fall.  For  the  rest  of  his  life  he  ruled  supreme  in 
the  ruined  city,  and  converted  the  sepulchre  of  the  Roman 
Empire  into  the  cradle  of  spiritual  sovereignty.  Before  his 
death  in  417  he  once  more  vindicated  his  appellate  claim  by  the 
condemnation  of  Pelagius,  whose  heretical  teaching  founded  the 
great  free-will  controversy,  which  held  the  place  in  the  West 
occupied  by  Trinitarianism  in  the  East.  By  adhering  to  the 
Augustinian  teaching  as  opposed  to  the  fatalism  of  Pelagius, 
Innocent  showed  that  readiness  to  identify  himself  with  the 
spirit  of  the  age  which  has  always  been  the  secret  of  papal 
success.  The  condemnation  of  Pelagius  by  Innocent  was  by  no 
means  a  foregone  conclusion :  Pelagius  himself  had  preached  in 
Rome,  and  the  Pope  had  not  interfered  to  prevent  him.  The 
success  of  the  appeal  against  the  heretic,  therefore,  gave  so 
much  gratification  to  the  African  fathers,  by  whom  it  was 
presented,  that  they  forgot  to  resent  the  tone  of  authority  in 
which  the  decision  was  made.  Once  again  the  astounding 
claims  passed  unchallenged  because  they  were  wisely  wielded  by 
an  able  Pope  for  the  benefit  of  the  Church  at  large,  and  no  one 
realised  the  danger  that  lurked  behind  the  simple  and  satisfactory- 
system  of  Church  government. 

The  pontificate  of  Innocent  showed  what  the  Papacy  might 
become  in  the  hands  of  a  "great  "Pope:  under  his  successors, 
the  conditional  aspect  becomes  emphasised.  Between  the  years 
417  and  440,  a  series  of  inefi'ective  Popes  did  their  best  to  undo 
what  Innocent  had  achieved.  The  evil  efi'ects  of  the  Gothic 
invasions  were  brought  to  light :  wealth  streamed  in  from  rich 
proselytes  and  crystallised  into  patrimonies,  while  the  process  of 
materialisation  sapped  the  spiritual  energy  of  the  Christian 
community. 

For  a  year  and  a  half  after  the  death  of  Innocent,  Pope 
Zosimus  fluctuated  between  the  conflicting  tides  of  Pelagianism 
and  orthodoxy,  and  the  African  fathers,  who  had  raised  no  protest 
when  Innocent  claimed  Apostolic  authority,  set  at  nought 
St.  Peter's  less  capable  successor,  and  appealed  against  him  to 
Csesar. 

The  death  of  Zosimus  was  the  signal  for  the  third  tumult 
known   to   history   on   the   occasion  of   a   papal   election.     An 


20  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

incredible  lack  of  definition  marked  the  area  of  the  electorate. 
The  clergy,  the  people,  the  Emperor,  each  claimed  a  voice,  and 
in  the  vagueness  of  their  relative  rights  and  the  utter  lack  of 
machinery,  the  power  of  election  was  apt  to  devolve  on  the 
faction  which  could  best  succeed  in  shouting  down  its  rivals. 
The  imperial  party  was  at  first  successful  in  this  case,  owing  to 
the  energy  of  the  prefect  Symmachus,  who  was  inclined  to 
support  Eulalius.  But  the  popular  party  was  loud  in  the  support 
of  Boniface,  and  the  irresolute  Emperor  decreed  a  suspension  of 
the  decision  during  which  both  candidates  were  to  absent 
themselves  from  Rome  and  a  synod  of  Bishops  was  to  be  called 
upon  to  arbitrate.  The  headstrong  Eulalius,  having  already 
been  received  with  pomp  in  St.  Peter's,  tried,  however,  to  force 
the  hand  of  Honorius  by  a  surprise  entry  into  Rome.  This  put 
him  in  the  wrong  and  left  the  honours  of  the  contest  to  his  rival. 
It  was  a  popular  victory,  inasmuch  as  Boniface  had  relied  on 
popular  favour,  but  all  the  fruits  of  the  contest  fell  to  the 
Emperor,  who  assumed,  as  a  right  inherent  in  the  imperial  office, 
the  power  to  determine  disputed  elections  to  the  Papacy. 

Boniface  was  succeeded  by  Celestine,  whose  pontificate  as  well 
as  that  of  Sixtus,  his  successor,  was  occupied  by  the  great 
Nestorian  conflict  in  the  East.  Like  the  Trinitarian  controversy 
of  which  it  was  an  offshoot,  Nestorianism  did  not  in  itself  afi"ect 
Western  Christianity :  it  was  even  more  intricate  and  meta- 
physical than  the  Arian  question,  and  it  absorbed  the  Papacy  in 
its  practical  rather  than  its  doctrinal  aspect,  as  an  interesting 
political  problem   and  not   as  a  vital   theological   contention. 

Indeed,  in  the  East  itself,  the  spiritual  controversy  was  far 
from  independent  of  political  strife,  and  the  rivalry  between 
Nestorius  of  Constantinople  and  Cyril  of  Alexandria  often  de- 
generated into  a  series  of  counter-intrigues,  centring  in  the 
Imperial  Court.  Nestorianism  was  an  application  of  the 
principles  underlying  Trinitarianism  to  the  person  of  the 
Virgin  Mary.  Nestorius  argued  against  the  title  "  God-bearer," 
as  applied  to  her  by  his  opponents.  Christ-bearer  she  was 
indeed — Mother  of  the  blended  personalities  in  her  Son ;  but 
that  which  was  born  of  her  was  not  the  Eternal  Word  which 
proceedeth  from  the  Father. 

in  429,  Rome  was  first  brought  into  the  conflict  by  the 
appeal  of  each  of  the  protagonists  in  turn — Nestorius  and 
Cyril.  True  to  the  traditions  of  Innocent,  Celestine  answered  in 
a  mandate,  ofi"ering  to  Nestorius  the  alternatives  either  of  abject 
apology  within  ten  days  or  excommunication.  In  December 
430,  Celestine  and  Cyril  combined  in  excommunicating  Nestorius, 


FALL  OF  KOME  TO  THE  COUNCIL  OF  EPHESUS    21 

who  clung  fearlessly  to  his  opinions  and  relied  on  the  favour  of 
the  Imperial  Court,  and  the  outcome  of  his  firmness  was  the 
first  General  Council  of  Ephesus  in  431.  Once  more  the 
unerring  papal  instinct  vindicated  the  appellate  claim  of  the 
Pope.  When  the  letters  of  Celestine  were  read  to  the  Council 
by  the  papal  representative,  they  were  found  to  coincide  so 
exactly  with  the  decision  at  which  the  Council  had  already 
arrived  that  a  chorus  of  acclamation  greeted  the  sentiments — 
"  The  Council  renders  thanks  to  the  Second  Paul,  Celestine ;  to 
the  Second  Paul,  Cyril ;  to  Celestine,  protector  of  the  faith ;  to 
Celestine.  unanimous  with  the  Council  ". 

The  Council  did  not  bring  the  heresy  to  an  end.  and 
Nestorianism  expired  only  when  it  was  finally  deserted  by  the 
Imperial  Court,  and  when  its  aged  author  died  of  the  dishonour 
of  exile.  But  with  the  close  of  the  Council,  the  intervention 
of  Rome  ends,  and  Sixtus  III.,  the  successor  of  Celestine,  erected 
a  memorial  to  the  contest  in  the  Church  of  Santa  Maria 
Maggiore. 


CHAPTER  IV 

LEO  THE  GREAT :  THE  HUNS  AND  THE  VANDALS, 
A.D.  431-460 

INNOCENT  I.  had  founded  the  Papacy  on  the  principles  of 
monarchy ;  to  Leo  I.  it  remained  to  give  it  an  imperial 
character.  The  first  "great"  Pope  was  great  in  virtue  of 
his  age  rather  than  in  spite  of  it ;  he  was  the  one  great  man  in 
an  age  which  is  singularly  destitute  of  nobility,  the  hero  of  an 
epoch  in  which  the  heroic  virtues  were  conspicuously  lacking. 
And  yet  he  is  eminently  representative  of  the  time,  and  there  is 
nothing  in  his  career  that  is  not  in  accordance  with  the  prin- 
ciples and  ideas  of  his  generation. 

Leo  was  a  Roman,  rugged  and  simple  in  character,  with  the 
practical  genius  of  his  race  showing  itself  in  a  large  capacity  for 
organisation,  and  a  strong  "imperial  purpose,"  which  effected 
the  transformation  of  the  papal  oflSce  from  an  indefinite  personal 
ascendancy  to  the  centre  of  a  world-wide  system.  His  early  life 
afi*orded  the  best  possible  training  for  his  high  office.  In  422, 
he  was  made  Archdeacon  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  between 
then  and  his  election,  in  439,  he  was  employed  on  various 
diplomatic  missions,  consummating  in  an  embassy  of  reconcilia- 
tion between  ^Etius  and  Albinus,  the  two  rival  generals  in  Gaul. 

Leo  showed  none  of  the  conventional  self-depreciation  on  his 
election  to  the  Papacy.  With  characteristic  simplicity  he 
expresses  his  confidence  that  "  He  will  give  the  power  Who 
bestowed  the  dignity,"  somewhat  to  the  astonishment  of  those 
who  had  elected  him,  who  had  probably  anticipated  the  usual 
dramatic  refusal  of  office  with  the  subsequent  submission  to 
compulsion.  The  self-confidence  of  Leo  stood  him  in  good  stead 
as  the  obstacles  in  the  way  of  papal  power  crowded  before  his 
eyes. 

The  first  enemy  which  he  had  to  encounter  was  the  advance 
of  heresy,  which  was  the  chief  menace  to  Catholic  unity,  now 
that  paganism  had  ceased  from  troubling  the  realms  of 
Christendom.  Leo's  method  of  attack  was  both  characteristic 
^nd  original,  and  singularly  effective.     He  was  the  first  Bishop 


LEO  THE  GREAT :  THE  HUNS  AND  VANDALS  23 

of  Rome  who  made  use  of  the  pulpit  as  a  real  means  of  reaching 
the   conscience   of  his  people.     In   his   sermons,  we   have   the 
clearest  picture  of  the  man  himself  which  the  times  afford,  as 
well  as  admirable  illustrations  of  his  methods.     His   style  is 
simple,    severe,   and    emphatic,    and    his    method    essentially 
Roman.     The   Catholic   faith,   he   holds,   is   true   and   easy   to 
comprehend;  it  admits  of  no  half-truth  and  needs  no  discus- 
sion.    Heretics,  therefore,  are   all   enemies   to   be   fought   and 
suppressed — anything   but  sincere   critics  open   to   conviction. 
All   contact  other  than   antagonistic  between  them  and   true 
believers  is  obnoxious,  and  the  most  offensive  are  those  nearest 
at  hand,  viz.,  the  Manicheeans.     Against  the  Manichseans,  Leo 
summons    all    the    invectives   which    a    forcible    diction    can 
muster,  and   launches   them   with   apostolic   fervour   into   the 
midst  of  his   hearers.     Having   stirred   up  public   opinion   by 
verbal  condemnation,  he  gives  it  vent  in  legal  persecution.     In 
443,  an  investigation  was  made  of  the  charges  of  immorality 
brought   against   the   Manichseans,  with  results   which    amply 
justify  Leo's  severity— at  all  events  in  the  light  of  the  principles 
"of  justice,  in  so  far  as  the  fifth  century  had  evolved  them.     The 
doctrine  of  Manes,  based  on  a  belief  in  the  inherent  evil  of  all 
matter,  had  been  made  to  cover  a  complete  disregard  of  any 
moral  principle  in  the   material   realm.      Good  and  evil  were 
said  to  have  no  relation  whatever  to  the  physical  nature  of  man, 
and    the    practical  outcome   of    such   a  creed  weighed   more 
strongly  with  Leo  than  any  theoretical  error  in  their  dogma. 
Instead  of  adding  fuel  to  the  flames  by  argument,  after  the 
fashion  of  an  Eastern  champion  of  orthodoxy,  Leo  quenched  the 
ardour   of  the  Manichseans  in   a  deluge  of  papal  anathemas, 
strengthened  by  imperial  edict. 

"The  citadel  of  the  devil  is  in  the  madness  of  the 
Manichffians,"  he  cries,  and  in  the  appeal  to  common  sense,  as 
opposed  to  irrational  extremism,  lies  the  clue  to  Leo's  success. 
The  influence  of  Manichseism  was  not  confined  to  the  obscene 
sect  which  cultivated  immorality  both  in  its  dogma  and  its 
ceremonial,  its  taint  is  to  be  felt  throughout  the  teaching  of  the 
Church  at  this  period ;  in  the  extravagant  adulation  of  celibacy, 
as  in  the  excesses  of  ascetic  mortification — even,  it  has  been 
said,  in  the  writings  of  St.  Augustine  himself— the  dignity  of  the 
body  suffers  from  the  artificial  conception  of  material  evil. 
Leo's  line  of  action  was  not,  however,  in  advance  of  his  age  in 
this  or  in  any  other  direction :  his  instinctive  practical  genius 
recoiled  from  extravagance  of  any  kind,  condemning  alike 
Catholics  whose  fasts  were  an  end  in  themselves  and  not  merely 


24  A  SHOET  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

a  means  of  grace,  and  Manichaeans  who  disregarded  all  moral 
obligation  for  self- discipline. 

Towards  Eutychianism— the  other  important  heretical  contest 
of  Leo's  pontificate— his  attitude  was  different.     Eutyches  was  a 
follower  of  Cyril,  and  his  doctrine  grew  out  of  the  computation 
of  the  Nestorian  heresy.    So  anxious  was  he  to  assert  the  perfect 
divinity  of  the  infant  Christ,  that  he  was  led  to  deny  the  twofold 
nature  of  the  Saviour.    It  was  essentially  an  Eastern  controversy, 
both  locally  and  typically,  and  Leo  showed  no  disposition  to 
interfere  until  he  was  appealed  to  by  both  parties  as  a  matter  of 
course.     Eastern  theology  had  become  fatally  bound  up  with  the 
politics  of  the  Imperial  Court,  and  the  conspicuous  lack  of  dignity 
which  characterises  the  Eutychian  controversy  shows  how  far 
the  Church  of  the  Eastern  Empire  had  deteriorated  since  the  days 
of  Constantino  and  Arius.     The  so-called  "  Robber  Council "  of 
Ephesus,  summoned  in  449  by  the  Emperor  under  Eutychian 
influences,  reinstated   Eutyches,  and  deposed  his  noble  antag- 
onist, Flavian,  who  died  of  the  effects  of  ill-treatment  at  the 
hands  of  the  lawless  heretical  monks.     This  had  been  done  in 
flagrant  disregard  of  the  protests  of  Hilary,  the  Roman  legate 
who  represented  Leo  at  Ephesus.     Leo's  indignation  knew  no 
bounds,   and   in  451,  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  gave  him  his 
opportunity    for    retaliation.       The    death     of    the     Emperor 
Theodosius  in  450,  and  the  accession  of  his  able  sister  Pulcheria 
was  the  immediate  cause  of  a  reaction  in  favour  of  the  anti- 
Eutychian  party.  "  At  Chalcedon,  Leo's  famous  "  Tome,"  which 
had  been  tumultuously  suppressed  at  Ephesus,  was  read  amidst 
the  acclamations  of  the  congregation— "  Accursed  be  he  that 
admits  not  that  Peter  has  spoken  by  the  mouth  of  Leo  " !     A 
more  solid  triumph  was  the  formal  Canonical  recogn  tion  of  the 
supremacy  of  Rome,  although  it  was  significantly  ascribed  solely 
to  the  imperial  rights  of  the  city. 

Leo's  "Tome"  marks  an  epoch  in  the  history  of  papal 
ascendancy  as  an  act  of  papal  definition,  which  carries  authority 
as  a  matter  of  course— violently  suppressed  for  this  reason  by 
the  party  asainst  whom  it  is  levelled,  and  welcomed  as  a  final 
and  authoritative  confirmation  of  their  triumph  by  the  champions 
of  orthodoxy.  In  itself,  the  "  Tome  "  was  characteristic  of  Leo— 
assertmg  with  emphasis  the  simplicity  of  the  truth,  and  ignoring 
as  unworthy  of  notice  the  Oriental  subtleties  involved  in  the 
basis  of  error. 

In  the  war  against  heresy,  the  Papacy  was  triumphantly 
vmdicated  by  Leo's  activities.  He  did  not  relax  his  vigour  in 
the   more  debatable    sphere   of  political   supremacy.      In    the 


LEO  THE  GKEAT :  THE  HUNS  AND  VANDALS  25 

so-called  "  birthday  sermons,"  preached  on  the  feasts  of  SS.  Peter 
and  Paul,  Leo  clearly  sets  forth  his  conctption  of  the  papal 
office,  in  terms  which  do  not  attempt  to  mitigate  the  absolutism 
implied,  or  to  gloss  over  any  of  the  consequences  of  its  recognition. 
He  grounds  the  Papal  authority  on  the  supremacy  of  St.  Peter, 
for  whom  he  claims  a  distinct  overlordship  among  the  Apostles. 
The  imperial  title  of  the  city  he  waives  as  a  mere  symbol :  "  the 
Apostles  it  is  who  have  brought  thee  to  such  a  height  of  glory  " — 
not  Csesar,  who  merely  paved  the  way  for  the  larger  dominion  of 
Christ.  The  Papacy  is  thus  raised  above  the  status  of  a 
patriarchate,  and  the  Pope  is  no  longer  primus  inter  j^ares,  but 
mediator  between  Christ  and  the  Apostles.  It  might  seem 
almost  as  if  the  uncompromising  assertions  of  Leo  courted  a 
challenge ;  at  anyrate  he  cannot  have  been  altogether  surprised 
at  the  sudden  defiance  of  his  antagonist,  Hilary  of  Aries. 
Hilary  was  a  worthy  champion  of  the  opposition,  combining  the 
qualities  of  sanctity  and  ambition  in  the  degree  in  which  they 
are  often  found  in  the  great  militant  Churchman  of  history.  He 
seems  to  have  held  vague  metropolitan  rights  in  Gaul,  which  he 
was  ambitious  of  extending — a  project  which  brought  him  into 
conflict  with  Celidonius,  Bishop  of  an  out-lying  diocese  over 
which  Hilary  claimed  rights  of  jurisdiction.  Both  Bishops 
appealed  to  Leo — Celidonius  as  a  suppliant;  Hilary,  as  a 
claimant  of  rights  which  had  been  infringed.  Leo  declared  in 
favour  of  Celidonius  and  summoned  a  Council  of  Bishops  to 
condemn  Hilary,  upon  which  Hilary  boldly  defied  the  authority 
of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  denying  any  limitation  to  his  own 
metropolitan  rights.  The  partisanship  of  the  respective  chron- 
iclers of  Leo  and  Hilary  has  wrapped  the  end  of  the  quarrel  in 
obscurity.  Whether  Hilary  submitted  in  penitent  dignity  to 
apostolic  reproof,  or  whether  he  was  overawed  by  papal  anathema, 
is  uncertain ;  the  facts,  at  least,  testify  to  Leo's  actual  triumph, 
while  they  leave  the  moral  issues  indecisive.  Celidonius  was 
righted,  and  Hilary  condemned  first  by  a  synod  of  Bishops,  and 
afterwards  by  an  imperial  decree  which  subordinated  Gaul 
complett^ly  to  the  Papacy,  and  thus  extinguished  the  first  flicker 
of  the  flame  of  Gallican  independence. 

The  conflict  between  Leo  and  Hilary  is  typical  of  a  series  of 
less  important  contests  by  which  Leo  made  the  theory  of  spiritual 
empire  an  actual  fact.  Aquileia,  Alexandria,  and  Illyria — all 
debatable  ground — were  reduced  from  a  vague  dependence  to  a 
definite  allegiance  to  the  "universal  dominion  of  Peter". 
Priscillianism  was  persecuted  in  Spain  by  papal  authority,  and 
in  Leo's  letters  to  refractory  Bishops,  infallibility  is  foreshadowed 
in  many  an  audacious  expression  of  divine  right. 


26  A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

Leo  had  already  shown  his  qualities  of  leadership  in  two 
aspects — as  the  champion  of  orthodoxy,  and  as  the  defender  of 
petrarchal  claims — before  he  stood  out  in  his  third  and  greatest 
capacity,  as  a  national  hero.  The  legend-loving  piety  of  the 
primitive  imas;ination,  as  well  as  the  poetic  genius  of  Raphael, 
has  done  an  injustice  to  the  simple  heroism  which  led  Leo  to 
the  camp  of  Attila,  on  the  banks  of  the  Mincio.  The  terror  of 
the  degenerate  Romans  at  the  coming  of  the  Huns,  enhanced  as 
it  was  by  their  "  inhuman "  appearance  and  the  remarkable 
military  qualities  of  their  leader,  reached  its  zenith  as  they 
watched  the  plundering  march  through  Friuli,  and  saw  the 
doom  approaching  which  the  "  scourge  of  God  " — a  second  and 
more  terrible  Alaric — threatened  to  lay  upon  the  city. 

Now  as  never  before,  Rome  stood  in  need  of  a  saviour,  and 
her  need  was  Leo's  opportunity.  Accompanied  by  the  consul 
Arienus,  and  the  ex-prefect  Trigetius,  he  set  out  at  the  head  of 
an  embassy,  which  the  Emperor  and  Senate  had  initiated  rather 
as  a  counsel  of  despair  than  as  a  hopeful  expedient  for  the 
deliverance  of  the  city.  Many  causes  have  been  alleged  for  the 
withdrawal  of  Attila  independent  of  Leo's  embassy  :  he  was  old 
and  already  stricken  with  the  disease  which  killed  him  within  a 
year  from  the  time — his  army  was  spent,  and  his  ambition 
satiated  by  the  siege  and  sack  of  Aquileia.  Moreover,  he  had 
not  recovered  from  defeat  at  the  renowned  battle  of  the 
Catalaunian  Fields,  since  when  he  had  been  troubled  with 
portents  and  auguries  which  had  shaken  his  faith  in  his  own 
mission.  These  things  may  have  helped  Leo,  but  they  cannot 
supersede  his  claim  to  have  effected  the  salvation  of  Rome. 
His  interview  with  Attila  was  brief  but  momentous,  and  history 
knows  nothing  of  it  but  its  results.  In  spite  of  the  attempts  to 
give,  on  the  one  hand,  a  prosaic  interpretation  of  the  withdrawal 
of  Attila,  and,  on  the  other,  to  supply  it  with  a  miraculous  origin, 
the  heroism  of  Leo  and  the  gratitude  due  to  him  remain 
unimpaired  by  either  the  scruples  of  historical  enquiry  or  the 
imaginative  fiction,  which  Raphael  has  immortalised  in  his 
representation  of  Attila  menaced  by  SS.  Peter  and  Paul. 

Three  years  later,  Leo  again  took  on  himself  the  defence  of 
the  city  by  another  embassy  to  another  barbarian  leader — 
the  Vandal  Genseric.  The  enterprise  was  more  desperate,  and  in 
its  achievement  less  successful.  The  spell  of  Christian  civilisa- 
tion could  not  appeal  with  the  same  force  to  the  conquering 
Vandal  within  sight  of  his  goal,  as  to  the  disheartened  Hunnish 
chief  with  all  Italy  lying  between  him  and  Rome.  Genseric, 
moreover,  had  diplomacy  on  his  side,  and  all  the  advantages  of 


LEO  THE  GREAT :  THE  HUNS  AND  VANDALS  27 

an  ugly  palace  intrigue  to  help  him.  He  came  as  the  declared 
opponent  of  the  tyrant  Maximus,  and  the  champion  of  the  ex- 
empress  and  her  wrongs,  and  there  was  no  question  of  buying 
him  off  with  tribute,  as  in  the  earlier  crisis  in  which  Leo  had 
delivered  Rome.  With  Rome  and  her  riches  open  to  the  gaze  of 
Genseric — her  prestige  broken  and  her  power  of  resistance 
null — it  was  useless  for  Leo  to  attempt  to  ward  off  the  Vandal 
sack  with  the  weapons  of  peace.  But  when  the  blow  fell,  and 
the  barbarian  hordes  poured  into  the  city,  the  debt  of  Rome  to 
its  patriot-bishop  was  felt  in  a  considerable  mitigation  of  the 
horrors  of  pillage.  But,  in  spite  of  Leo's  efforts,  the  Vandal  sack 
remains  a  byword  for  indiscriminate  plunder :  all  that  Alaric 
had  left  undone,  Genseric  proceeded  to  carry  out,  and  the  lowest 
depths  of  humiliation,  which  half  a  century  of  barbarian 
invasion  had  left  unsounded,  were  reserved  for  Rome  to 
experience  at  the  hands  of  the  Vandal  pirates. 

Leo  lived  just  long  enough  to  witness  the  fruitless  efforts  of 
Majorian  to  recover  the  lost  energy  of  the  Romans,  and  in 
461  he  died,  in  the  same  year  as  the  Emperor,  his  only  noble 
contemporary,  who  shared  with  him  the  Roman  qualities  of 
disinterested  self-sacrifice. 


CHAPTER  V 
GOTHIC  RULE,  a.d.  461-568 

THE  importance  of  the  century  following  the  death  of 
Leo  in  the  history  of  the  Papacy  is  political  rather  than 
personal.  There  are  on  the  one  hand  no  very  distin- 
guished occupants  of  the  Holy  See,  and  on  the  other  hand  events 
of  the  most  crucial  importance  follow  each  other  with  bewilder- 
ing rapidity.  The  extinction  of  the  Western  Roman  Empire, 
the  rise  of  the  Gothic  kingdom,  the  re-conquest  of  Italy  by 
Byzantine-Roman  arms,  and  the  coming  of  the  forces  of 
disruption  in  the  Lombard  settlement  of  the  North — these  in 
turn  monopolise  the  history  of  Rome,  and  effect  the  final 
transformation  of  the  ancient  world  into  the  Middle  Ages,  while 
the  Papacy,  as  yet  unconscious  of  victory,  pursues  its  even  way 
in  undisturbed  self-confidence. 

Thus,  when  in  476 — fifteen  years  after  the  death  of  Leo — 
the  boy-Emperor  Romulus  Augustulus  abdicated  at  the 
dictation  of  his  Major-Domo,  Odoacer,  and  the  Empire  of 
the  West  exchanged  its  last  Csesar  for  the  rule  of  a  German 
official,  the  reigning  Pope  makes  no  comment.  It  really  made 
very  little  difference.  The  position  of  the  Bishop  was  much 
the  same  whether  Rome  was  ruled  by  a  titular  Emperor 
under  the  domination  of  a  Gothic  military  leader,  or  by  the 
same  barbarian  claiming  to  represent  the  absentee  Emperor  of 
the  East,  So  at  least  thought  Simplicius  (468-483)  as  he  watched 
with  apparent  indifference  the  confusion  which  attended  the 
short  reigns  of  the  ill-starred  Emperors  who  followed  each  other 
in  rapid  succession,  until  the  resignation  of  Augustulus.  The 
Roman  Empire  might  have  deserved  a  less  inglorious  end,  and  a 
panegyric  might  well  have  seemed  out  of  place ;  moreover, 
Simplicius  was  himself  absorbed  in  a  quarrel  with  the  Bishop  of 
Constantinople,  which  no  doubt  appeared  of  greater  moment 
than  the  dynastic  misfortunes  of  the  degenerate  Imperial  House. 
So  the  Roman  Empire  passed  away,  unwept  by  its  citizens,  who 
failed  to  trace  in  its  fall  the  glories  of  its  wonderful  past,  and 

28 


GOTHIC  RULE  29 

unsaluted  by  the  power  which  was  to  inherit  its  sway  in  the 
future,  already  foreshadowed  in  the  steady  growth  of  the 
spiritual  dominion. 

Perhaps  the  temporal  prosperity  of  the  Papacy  was  in  some 
measure  responsible  for  this  detached  interest  displayed  by  the 
Popes  in  home  politics.  It  must  at  this  period  have  been 
extremely  rich,  for  Hilary  of  Sardinia  (Pope  461-465)  is  recorded 
to  have  spent  fabulous  suras  in  the  restoration  of  buildings  which 
had  been  destroyed  in  the  Vandal  sack.  At  anyrate,  the  quarrel 
with  the  East  looms  far  larger  on  the  papal  horizon  than  the  poli- 
tical vicissitudes  of  Rome,  and  for  more  than  thirty-five  years 
the  attention  of  the  Popes  is  distracted  from  the  critical  condition 
of  Italian  afi'airs.  The  cause  of  hostility  was  a  characteristic 
combination  of  doctrinal  controversy  and  personal  rivalry.  The 
two  main  contentions  centre  round  the  usurpations  of  Acacius 
of  Constantmople,  who  had  assumed  the  title  of  '  Mother  of  all 
Christians  of  the  orthodox  religion,"  and  the  Emperor  Zeno's 
attempts  to  settle  the  monophysite  heresy  by  an  act  of  imperial 
definition.  Simplicius  opened  the  breach  by  excommunicating 
Acacius,  and  his  successor  Felix  III.  widened  it  by  condemning 
the  "  Henoticon  "  of  Zeno.  The  lengths  to  which  schismatic  strife 
was  prepared  to  go  is  illustrated  by  the  posthumous  reputation 
of  Pope  Anastasius — a  man  of  peace,  who  in  496  shrank  from 
anathematising  the  dead  Acacius — "Felix  and  Acacius  are  now 
both  before  a  higher  tribunal.  Leave  them,"  he  pleaded,  '-to 
that  unerring  judgment ".  For  this  latitudinarian  sentiment 
the  gentle  Anastasius  forfeited  his  canonisation  in  the  "Liber 
Pontificalis,"  and  Dante,  nearly  seven  centuries  later,  confirms 
the  verdict  by  describing  him  in  the  "Inferno".  The  quarrel 
dwindled  on  until  the  accession  of  the  orthodox  Emperor 
Justin,  who  is  content  to  sacrifice  the  memory  of  Acacius  to 
papal  execration,  unlike  his  more  obdurate  predecessor  whose 
death  at  the  age  of  88  was  somewhat  groundlessly  ascribed  by 
the  papal  party  to  the  vengeance  of  Heaven  for  his  champion- 
ship of  the  memory  of  the  Bishop. 

Meanwhile,  the  peace-policy  of  Pope  Anastasius,  so  far  from 
restoring  unity  between  East  and  West,  had  merely  created 
schism  in  the  Papacy  itself.  On  his  death  in  498,  the  See  was 
contested  by  Symmachus  and  Lawrence,  who  claimed  to 
represent  the  no-compromise  and  the  peace-party  respectively. 
Theodoric  the  Goth  had  meanwhile  supplanted  Odoacer  and 
established  his  beneficent  rule  in  Italy,  in  professed  dependence 
on  the  nominal  suzerainty  of  the  Eastern  Emperor.  To  Theodoric, 
renowned  alike  for  political  justice  and  for  religious  tolerance, 


30  A  SHOKT  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

both  Symmachus  and  Lawrence  appealed,  and  the  Gothic  king 
gave  the  decision  in  favour  of  Symmachus,  who  boasted  the 
advantages  of  an  earlier  consecration  and  a  greater  number  of 
votes  than  his  rival.  In  spite  of  the  confirmation  of  this  verdict 
by  the  so-called  Palmary  Synod  in  501,  Lawrence  and  his  faction 
continued  to  be  troublesome  until  the  year  514,  and  when  at 
last  the  schism  died  down,  Symmachus  showed  his  gratitude  by 
adorning  the  already  magnificent  Church  of  St.  Peter  with 
marble,  and  building  an  "Episcopia"  or  Bishop's  house,  thus 
entitling  him  to  be  called  the  founder  of  the  Vatican. 

Symmachus  was  succeeded  in  514  by  Hormesdas,  whose 
pontificate  is  chiefly  famous  for  the  termination  of  the  Mono- 
physite  schism.  The  same  Emperor  Justin,  whose  orthodoxy 
healed  the  breach,  created  fresh  trouble  by  a  decree  against 
Arianism,  which  was  probably  intended  as  a  direct  blow  at  the 
authority  of  the  over-mighty  vassal  King  of  Italy.  The  religious 
policy  of  Theodoric  was  worthy  of  his  admirable  ruling 
capacities.  His  Arianism  did  not  stand  in  the  way  of  his  justice 
to  Catholicism,  and  he  never  felt  the  slightest  temptation  to 
persecute.  The  splendid  defence  of  toleration  with  which  he 
met  the  edict  of  Justin  is  a  standing  monument  to  the  greatness 
of  his  mental  vision — "To  pretend  to  a  dominion  over  the 
conscience,"  he  says  in  his  letter  to  Justin,  "  is  to  usurp  the 
prerogative  of  God :  by  the  nature  of  things  the  power  of 
sovereigns  is  confined  to  political  government;  they  have  no 
right  of  punishment  but  over  those  who  disturb  the  public 
peace ;  the  most  dangerous  heresy  is  that  of  a  sovereign  who 
separates  himself  from  part  of  his  subjects  because  they  believe 
not  according  to  his  belief".  Such  a  noble  expression  of  opinion 
deserved  a  more  generous  reception  than  was  accorded  to  it 
by  the  Emperor  Justin,  especially  when  it  was  delivered  by  an 
ambassador  of  no  less  dignity  than  the  Bishop  of  Rome  himself. 
In  spite  of  protests  and  excuses,  John  I.  had  been  forced  by 
Theodoric  to  undertake  an  unwelcome  journey  to  Constantinople, 
and  to  plead  for  Arian  toleration  with  the  Emperor,  to  whose 
rigid  orthodoxy  the  Papacy  owed  its  victory  in  the  monophysite 
struggle  so  lately  terminated.  The  Emperor  left  nothing  to  be 
desired  in  the  outward  deference  with  which  he  treated  the 
Pope :  he  knelt  at  his  feet  and  processed  with  him  through  the 
glitterins;  streets  of  new  Rome.  But,  whether  through  the  half- 
heartedness  of  John  or  the  politic  orthodoxy  of  Justin,  the 
embassy  failed  in  its  main  object,  and  the  persecuting  edict 
remained  unrepealed.  The  Pope  paid  the  penalty  for  defeat  by  an 
ignominious  death  in  captivity  at  the  hands  of  Theodoric,  and  in 


GOTHIC  KULE  31 

recognition  of  his  sufferings  the  "  Liber  Pontificalis  "  affords  him 
the  honour  of  canonisation. 

John  I.  was  succeeded  by  Felix  IV.,  the  nominee  of  Theodoric, 
whose  growing  absolutism  had  neither  increased  his  popularity 
nor  improved  his  character.  In  the  same  year  (526)  Theodoric 
died,  leaving  his  kingdom  exposed  to  the  fatal  perils  of  a 
minority  and  the  regency  of  his  able  but  imprudent  daughter. 

The  reign  of   Theodoric  forms  an  epoch  in  the  history  of 
Italy,  a  momentary  relief  amid  the  storm-clouds  which  stretch 
before  and  after — when  the  avenging  hand  seems  for  an  instant 
stayed,  and  Rome,  the  poverty-stricken  and  siege-worn  victim  of 
her  relentless  doom,  is  "  Felix  Roma  "  once  more.    It  is  true  that 
dark  deeds  stain  the  hero's  path — deeds  of  treachery,  such  as 
the  murder  of  Odoacer ;  of  despotic  self-will,  in  his  treatment  of 
Pope   John — and    above    all    the    promptings   of    a   yet   more 
barbarous  suspicion,  which  darken  the  close  of  his  career,  by  the 
imprisonment  and  death  of  the  philosopher  Boethius.     And  yet, 
Theodoric  the  Ostrogoth  is  among  the  wisest  and  best  rulers 
that  Italy  has  ever  known.     Great  in  his  aims — the  unification 
of  Italy  under  the  dynasty  of  the  Amal — great  in  his  achieve- 
ments, the  revival  of  law  and  order  in  his  distracted  dominion, 
he  stands  out  as  the  first  of  the  founders  of  modern  Italy,  and 
his  failure  to  establish  an  enduring  unity  cannot  be  taken  as  the 
measure  of  his  success.     His  attempt  was  in  one  sense  prema- 
ture, for  Italy  had  not  yet  realised  her  need ;  in  another  sense, 
it  was  too  late,  for  it  required  as  the  imperative  condition  of  its 
success  the  co-operation   of  the   Papacy,  and   the   Popes   had 
already  learnt  that  their  personal  autocracy  was  best  assured  in 
the  absence  of  any  effective  civil  authority,  independent  of,  or 
superior  to  their  own.     The  great  moments  of  the  Papacy  had 
hitherto  been  moments  of  crisis  in  periods  of  stress  and  storm. 
The  pontificate  of  Innocent  had  coincided  with  the  invasion  of 
Alaric;    Leo  the  Great  had  stood  face  to  face  with  Attila  the 
Hun,  and  he  alone  had  saved  Rome  from  the  worst  horrors  of 
the  Vandal  sack.     His  successors  had  yet  to  learn  that  spiritual 
weapons  unsupported  by  temporal  force  may  avail  for  a  moment 
to   avert   a  political   catastrophe,   but   they   cannot   suffice   to 
preserve  the  independence  of  national  existence   against   the 
steady  opposition  of   a  determined  rival,  in  long  stretches  of 
peace  and  repose. 

During  the  ten  years  which  followed  the  death  of  Theodoric, 
the  Gothic  kingdom  fell  to  pieces,  and  the  Popes  at  first 
welcomed  the  change  from  the  respectful  despotism  of  Theodoric 
to  the  magnanimous  weakness  of  the  regent  Amalasuntha.     The 


32     A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

Arianism  of  the  House  of  Theodoric,  which  prevented  any  close 
alliance  with  the  Papacy,  gave  at  the  same  time  an  advantage  to 
the  Roman  Bishop,  by  raising  him  to  the  position  of  intermediary 
between  the  ruling  House  and  the  Eastern  Emperor.  Moreover, 
Theodoric  had  latterly  fixed  his  seat  of  government  at  Ravenna, 
thus  leaving  Rome  to  the  Pope.  To  these  advantages  was  now 
added,  in  the  pontificate  of  Felix  IV.,  a  judicial  supremacy, 
according  to  which  the  Pope  was  given  the  power  to  determine 
all  cases  between  the  clergy  and  the  laity.  But  in  spite  of  the 
fact  that  the  position  of  the  Popes  under  the  House  of  Theodoric 
was  a  strong  one,  we  find  them  already  looking  towards  the 
East  for  deliverance.  Already  they  turned  to  the  foreigner  over 
the  seas,  as  later  they  sought  a  protector  beyond  the  Alps,  to 
save  them  from  the  ruler  on  the  spot — the  defender  within 
their  gates,  whose  ever-present  authority  was  irksome,  even  when 
it  lavished  favours  on  its  exacting  prot6g6. 

The  Emperor  Justinian  was  more  than  ready  to  listen  to  the 
complaints  of  the  Pope,  groundless  as  they  were,  and  throughout 
the  reign  of  Theodatus  a  policy  of  intrigue  with  the  East  was 
handed  down  from  each  Bishop  to  his  successor.  John  II. 
(532-535)  received  a  magnificent  embassy  bearing  gifts  and  ac- 
companied by  a  message  of  protest  against  the  alleged  misdoing 
of  Theodatus.  John's  aged  successor,  Agapetus,  was  sent  to 
Constantinople  by  Theodatus  to  convey  in  polite  terms  the 
Gothic  king's  defiance :  like  his  predecessor  in  similar  circum- 
stances, he  was  received  with  the  utmost  possible  deference,  but 
the  political  issues  soon  became  swamped  in  a  theological 
contention,  and  Agapetus  died,  covered  with  controversial  glory. 

The  pontificate  of  Silverius  (536)  saw  the  arrival  of  Belisarius, 
and  the  overthrow  of  Theodatus  the  Goth.  Silverius  with  short- 
sighted enthusiasm  threw  wide  the  gates  of  Rome  and  welcomed 
the  deliverer  who  came  under  the  banner  of  the  Roman  Empire. 
He  made  himself  the  tool  of  the  Byzantine  conqueror,  only  to 
fall  a  victim  to  the  intrigues  of  the  Imperial  Court.  Belisarius 
brought  in  his  train  a  certain  Vigilius,  an  ecclesiastical  advent- 
urer of  extraordinary  ability  and  boundless  ambition.  Vigilius 
had  accompanied  Agapetus  on  his  embassy  to  Constantinople, 
where  he  entered  into  an  unscrupulous  bargain  with  the 
Empress  Theodora,  whose  influence  dominated  Justinian  and 
his  Empire.  The  contention  of  Agapetus  had  been  directed 
against  a  protege-bishop  of  Theodora's,  who  had  been  accused  of 
Eutychian  opinions,  and  had  refused  to  declare  his  allegiance  to 
the  Council  of  Chalcedon.  Theodora  was  bent  on  restoring  the 
suspected  heretic  to  the  See  of  Constantinople  to  which  he  had 


GOTHIC  RULE  33 

been  nominated.  She  therefore  summoned  Vigilins,  who  under- 
took to  recognise  the  heretic  Anthinus,  and,  further,  to  repudiate 
himself  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  which  practically  pledged 
him  to  Eutychian  opinions.  His  compensation  was  to  be  no  less 
than  the  Roman  pontificate,  as  soon  as  the  arms  of  Belisarius 
could  procure  it  for  him,  and  the  overthrow  of  Silverius  create 
a  vacancy.  No  sooner  was  Belisarius  safely  established  in  the 
city  than  flimsy  charges  of  transactions  with  the  Goths  were 
brought  forward  against  the  unfortunate  Silverius.  The  charges 
were  supported  by  the  dramatic  display  of  Theodora's  second 
accomplice,  the  wife  of  Belisarius.  "  Tell  us.  Pope  Silverius," 
she  asked,  as  she  lay  on  her  couch  with  the  conqueror  at  her 
feet,  "What  have  we  and  the  Romans  done,  that  you  should 
wish  to  give  us  up  into  the  hands  of  the  Goths  "  ?  Dumbfounded 
at  the  preposterous  charges,  Silverius  failed  to  exculpate  him- 
self, and  the  interested  populace  was  briefly  informed  that 
"  Pope  Silverius  was  deposed  and  had  become  a  monk  ". 

Vengeance  was  not  long  in  overtaking  Vigilius,  who  proved 
unable  to  win  the  favour  of  the  Roman  people  by  acting  as  their 
benefactor  during  the  siege  of  the  city  by  the  Gothic  Vitiges. 
Moreover,  he  unwisely  broke  with  Constantinople,  by  refusing  to 
support  the  Emperor  in  his  condemnation  of  the  so-called 
'•  Three  Chapters  ".  This  was  a  well-meant  but  misguided  attempt 
of  Justinian's  to  secure  uniformity  by  condemning  the  writings 
of  three  priests  who  had  previously  been  acquitted  of  heresy  by 
the  Council  of  Chalcedon.  Vigilius  was  peremptorily  summoned 
to  Constantinople,  and  in  446  he  left  Rome  amid  the  execrations 
of  his  disaflfected  flock.  "Evil  hast  thou  done  to  us!"  they 
cried  after  him,  "  May  evil  follow  thee  wherever  thou  art ! " 
The  story  of  his  doings  in  Constantinople  is  an  ignominious 
page  of  papal  history.  He  first  submitted  to  imperial  terrorism, 
and  condemned  the  "Three  Chapters".  Then,  finding  himself 
deserted  by  the  Western  Bishops,  he  anathematised  Justinian's 
usurpation  of  ecclesiastical  authority.  Thus,  having  alienated 
the  Eastern  Bishops,  who  refused  to  have  any  dealings  with  him, 
he  took  sanctuary  and  sufi'ered  indignities  which  extorted  the 
contemptuous  pity  of  his  adversaries.  After  more  vacillations, 
he  was  confirmed  by  the  support  of  seventeen  Western  Bishops 
in  his  opposition  to  the  Emperor,  at  the  fifth  quasi-oecumenical 
Council  in  553,  venturing  so  far  as  to  write  a  defence  of  the  "  Three 
Chapters  "  in  answer  to  Justinian's  attack.  Finally,  in  exile  on 
the  rock  of  Proconnosus,  he  again  recanted,  and  after  a  full 
submission  to  the  Emperor  was  sufi'ered  to  set  out  for  Rome, 
which  he  did  not  reach  alive. 

3 


34  A  SHOET  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

The  career  of  Vigilius  proves  that  the  Papacy  was  still  a 
purely  moral  institution,  which  must  stand  or  fall  according  as 
the  Bishops  prove  worthy  or  unworthy  of  their  calling.  It  proves 
also  that  the  yoke  of  Byzantium  was  in  reality  more  fatal  to  its 
growth  than  the  domination  of  the  Goths. 

While  Vigilius  was  suffering  his  inglorious  martyrdom  at  the 
hands  of  Justinian,  a  more  heroic  drama  was  being  enacted 
round  the  walls  of  old  Rome.  The  meteor-like  career  of  Totila, 
the  young  Gothic  Hannibal,  lives  in  history  to  disprove  the 
charges  brought  against  the  Goths  by  prejudiced  chroniclers  of 
the  Middle  Ages,  who  passed  down  to  our  own  day  the  fiction 
that  the  Goths  were  the  destroyers  of  Rome.  It  is  true  that  the 
city  suffered  a  time  of  almost  unparallelled  distress  when  in  546 
the  young  conqueror  besieged  it  for  more  than  a  year ;  it  is  true, 
moreover,  that  Totila  in  the  heat  of  contest  threatened  to  "  turn 
the  whole  city  into  pasture  for  cattle  ".  But  the  threat  was  never 
carried  out,  and  Rome  suffered  no  worse  mutilation  than  the 
destruction  of  a  part  of  her  walls.  The  deacon,  Pelagius,  taking 
to  himself  the  rdle  of  Innocent  and  Leo  in  the  absence  of  their 
unworthy  representative,  appealed  in  vain  for  a  reprieve  during 
the  siege :  on  the  entry  of  Totila,  he  confronted  him  again  on 
the  threshold  of  St.  Peter's,  and  with  a  humility  born  of  pastoral 
pity,  he  pleaded  for  the  city — "  Lord,  spare  thine  own  ". 

"Comest  thou  then  as  a  suppliant,  0  Pelagius?"  asked 
Totila. 

"  God  has  made  me  thy  servant :  therefore  spare,  0  my  Lord, 
thy  servants  " — answered  the  priest. 

Fm'ther  appeal  was  probably  unnecessary  to  move  the  heart 
of  the  chivalrous  young  king,  but  had  Pelagius  not  prevailed,  it 
would  have  been  hard  to  turn  a  deaf  ear  to  the  dignified 
pleading  of  Belisarius  against  the  destruction  of  the  buildings. 
"Such  an  outrage,"  he  wrote,  "would  rob  our  ancestors  of  the 
monuments  of  their  virtues  and  posterity  of  the  sight  of  their 
works.  .  .  .  Art  thou  victor  ?  destroying  her  thou  wilt  not  lose 
the  city  of  another,  but  thine  own.  Preserving  her  thou  wilt 
enrich  thyself  with  the  most  splendid  possession  of  the  earth." 

Totila  paid  the  price  of  his  clemency  on  the  field  of  Taginas, 
where  he  died  a  hero's  death  before  the  walls  of  the  city  which 
he  had  forborn  to  destroy,  and  which  in  consequence  he  had 
twice  proved  unable  to  hold.  His  death  closes  the  period  of  the 
Gothic  wars,  and  ushers  in  the  new  era.  Five  sieges  and  five 
sacks  had  left  their  mark  on  the  city,  which  had  sunk  into  a 
state  of  social  chaos  and  economic  despair.  The  Pragmatic 
Sanction  of  Justinian  (554)  was  a  noble  attempt  to  restore  its 


GOTHIC  KULE  35 

fallen  prosperity,  but  Rome  had  sunk  into  a  state  from  which  a 
code  was  powerless  to  save  it,  and  we  read  with  a  certain  pathos 
the  statutory  provision  for  the  payment  by  the  starving  city 
of  grammarians,  rhetoricians,  and  legists,  "  in  order  that  youth 
trained  in  the  liberal  sciences  may  flourish  in  the  Roman 
Empire  ". 

In  spite  of  the  insidious  dangers  of  Byzantine  despotism,  the 
Papacy  reaped  considerable  advantage  from  the  results  of  the 
Gothic  wars.  The  overthrow  of  the  Arian  dynasty  was  naturally 
the  triumph  of  orthodoxy,  and  the  removal  from  Italy  of  the 
independent  Gothic  kingdom  released  the  Popes  from  an 
unwelcome  cm'b  on  their  independence.  More  definite  were  the 
advantages  bestowed  by  Justinian's  legislation,  which  transferred 
the  plenary  civil  power  to  the  Pope  with  the  assistance  of  the 
Senate.  There  could  be  no  question  henceforth  that  the  Pope 
was  the  chief  ruler  in  Rome,  and  his  authority  in  the  city  was 
so  well  and  so  soon  established  that  neither  the  Byzantine 
exarch,  or  viceroy,  from  his  seat  at  Ravenna,  nor  his  local 
representative,  the  Ducatus  Romanus,  could  seriously  compete 
with  him  in  the  years  to  come. 

Pelagius,  the  deacon,  succeeded  Vigilius  as  Pope  in  555,  but  it 
is  disappointing  to  see  that  after  the  noble  activity  which  he 
showed  in  his  meetings  with  Totila,  he  goes  out  to  Constantinople, 
heaps  up  riches,  which  it  is  true  he  spends  lavishly  in  Rome, 
and  in  spite  of  an  oath  of  purgation,  he  never  entirely  clears 
himself  from  the  suspicion  of  having  been  cognisant  of  the 
death  of  Vigilius.  He  w^as  succeeded  by  John  III.,  whose 
pontificate  coincides  with  the  first  appearance  of  the  Lombards 
in  North  Italy,  and  the  gathering  of  the  clouds  for  a  new  and 
terrible  storm.  The  Pope  is  said  to  have  averted  the  doom  of 
Italy  by  an  embassy  of  conciliation  to  the  fallen  exarch  Narses, 
who  from  his  sullen  retreat  in  Naples  was  said  to  be  plotting 
vengeance  with  the  Northern  invaders  and  their  king,  Alboin. 
It  was  only  a  momentary  reprieve :  the  "  swords  of  the 
Lombards  "  were  never  for  long  at  rest  in  their  scabbards,  and 
the  terror  of  their  name  spread  a  new  panic  through  Italy.  For 
there  was  a  new  persistency  in  their  movements,  unlike  any- 
thing to  which  Italy  had  hitherto  been  subjected  among  all  the 
invasions  of  the  barbarians.  Alaric  had  swept  through  Italy 
sowing  disaster  and  withdrawn  ;  Attila  had  plundered  the  North, 
and  fallen  back  in  awe  before  Leo  and  the  might  of  the  Lord ; 
the  Vandals  had  wreaked  their  piratical  vengeance  in  one  fell 
swoop  on  Rome,  and  carried  their  plunder  away  over  the  sea 
never  to  return  ;  and  the  Ostrogoths  had  tarried  in  peace  and 


36  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

justice  among  the  Romans  until  the  jealousy  of  the  Emperor 
drove  them  forth.  But  the  Lombards  brought  their  wives  and 
children,  and  settled  in  the  fertile  valley  of  the  Po.  They 
murdered  their  enemies  and  made  their  skulls  into  drinking- 
cups.  They  had  no  fear  of  the  Unseen,  and  no  reverence  for 
priests.  They  alone  among  the  devastators  of  the  fallen  Empire 
seem  utterly  destitute  of  all  qualities  of  nobility,  and  by  their 
cruelty,  their  treachery,  and  their  lack  of  rudimentary  personal 
honour,  leave  no  room  for  any  kind  of  admiration.  And  yet, 
they  alone  of  the  barbarian  tribes  gained  a  permanent  foothold 
in  Italy  and  achieved  an  ultimate  union  of  race. 


CHAPTER  VI 

MORAL  SUPREMACY  :   THE  EPOCH  OF  GREGORY  THE  GREAT 

A.D.  568-604 

WHILE  Italy  lay  prostrate  under  the  vengeance  of  the 
Goth,  the  fury  of  the  Lombard,  and  the  tyranny  of 
Byzantium,  the  freshening  spirit  of  a  new  monasti- 
ciem  breathed  from  the  groves  of  Subiaco  and  spread  to  the 
heights  of  Monte  Cassino.  It  is  often  the  case  that  a  time  of 
acute  distress  endows  men  with  unusual  powers  of  vision,  and  a 
period  of  turmoil  not  infrequently  produces  a  reaction  of 
spiritual  force.  It  is  therefore  not  altogether  surprising  that 
the  sixth  century  should  have  produced  two  such  men  as 
St.  Benedict  and  St.  Gregory. 

The  monastic  ideal  of  St.  Benedict  was  founded  on  the  con- 
templative mysticism  of  Jerome,  and  was  adapted  to  meet  the 
needs  of  Western  Christendom  by  the  suppression  of  exotic  ex- 
travagance and  the  infusion  of  practical  organisation.  The  life  of 
spiritual  retirement  and  simple  manual  labour  had  an  irresistible 
attraction  for  those  whose  characters  were  too  gentle  for  these 
hard  times,  and  the  personality  of  Benedict  spread  its  influence 
wherever  the  spell  of  holiness  could  be  exercised.  From  the 
metropolis  of  Monte  Cassino,  the  Benedictine  rule  radiated 
throughout  Italy,  until  every  unsequestered  district  and  many  a 
mountain  fastness  held  in  its  unpretentious  religious  house  a 
silent  witness  to  the  Gospel  of  peace. 

The  spread  of  monasticism  was  not  without  its  importance 
in  the  history  of  papal  power.  The  new  monasteries — unlike 
their  predecessors  in  their  strong  corporate  life,  and  their 
industrial  efficiency — were  the  outposts  of  the  spiritual  dominion 
as  the  military  colonies  had  been  of  the  Empire.  Foremost 
among  their  ranks  were  the  young  Roman  nobles — portionless 
boys  and  undowered  girls,  whose  fathers  had  fallen  in  the 
barbarian  wars,  as  well  as  the  more  fortunate  young  aristocrats, 
who  lavished  their  wealth  on  the  houses  which  sheltered  them, 
and  purchased  by  their  renunciation  the  straight  and  open  way 
of  eternal  happiness. 

Such  was  the  youthful  Gregory,  the  scion  of  an  Imperial 

37 


38  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

House,  from  which  he  inherited  the  graces  of  Roman  nobility 
combined  with  an  exceptional  spiritual  tradition.  "A  saint 
among  saints,"  as  he  is  described  by  John  the  Deacon,  his  youth 
was  spent  in  the  decadent  Roman  world,  which  claimed  his 
talents  and  his  abnormal  endowments,  but  never  won  his  soul. 
Of  singular  personal  beauty,  which  he  inherited  from  both  his 
father  and  his  mother,  he  dressed  with  a  splendour  befitting  his 
station,  and  lived  the  ordinary  life  of  the  young  Roman  noble, 
until  the  death  of  his  father  in  573.  He  was  no  sudden 
conversion  from  a  life  of  pleasure  to  the  life  of  the  cloister.  As 
long  as  his  father  lived,  possibly  in  obedience  to  the  parental 
will,  he  had  thrown  himself  heart  and  soul  into  the  career  which 
had  been  designed  for  him,  rising  before  the  age  of  thirty  to  the 
responsible  office  of  prsetor  of  Rome. 

But  he  had  striven  always  to  "  live  to  God,"  and  throughout 
his  gay  youth  the  example  of  Benedict  lay  deep-hidden  in 
his  soul.  When  at  last  the  moment  came,  and  Gregory,  still  in 
his  early  manhood,  became  his  own  master,  he  turned  calmly 
away  from  the  world,  which  had  never  attracted  him,  to  that 
serener  life  which  appealed  no  more  in  vain.  He  did  not  at 
first  repudiate  altogether  the  claims  of  secular  life,  contenting 
himself  with  filling  his  father's  villa  with  the  monastic  guests 
whom  he  delighted  to  honour.  Thus  gradually  and  by  slow 
degrees  he  severed  the  bonds  which  held  him  back,  until  he 
adopted  first  the  rule  and  then  the  habit  of  the  Benedictines 
himself,  and  finally  converted  the  Roman  villa  into  the  monastery 
of  St.  Andrews.  With  the  rest  of  his  patrimony  he  endowed  six 
monasteries  in  Sicily,  and  gave  alms  on  the  lavish  and  indis- 
criminate scale  which  his  warm  heart  dictated.  His  Roman 
pride,  his  political  activity,  his  humanistic  leanings — all  became 
submerged  in  the  austerities  of  the  Benedictine  rule,  but  the 
soul  of  the  mystic  blossomed  into  joy  in  the  spiritual  garden  of 
St.  Andrews,  and  in  the  years  which  followed,  his  heart  never 
swerved  from  its  first  enthusiastic  allegiance  to  the  life  of  the 
cloister.  Playing  on  a  favourite  metaphor  which  recurs  again 
and  again  in  his  writings,  he  describes  the  world  as  a  rough  sea, 
and  the  monastery  as  a  calm  haven,  where  "  the  ship  of  the 
soul "  is  at  rest.  "■  My  unhappy  mind  remembers  what  it  was  in 
the  cloister,"  he  writes  as  Pope  in  the  preface  to  the  "  Dialogues  " 
— "  How  it  soared  above  fleeting  things  because  it  thought  only  of 
things  celestial.  ...  I  ponder  on  what  I  now  endure  ;  I  ponder 
on  what  I  have  lost.  For  lo !  now  I  am  shaken  by  the  waves  of 
a  great  sea,  and  in  the  ship  of  the  mind  I  am  dashed  by  the 
storms  of  a  strong  tempest." 


MOKAL  SUPREMACY  39 

There  is  a  general  vagueness  as  to  the  dates  of  the  earlier 
events  in  Gregory's  life,  but  after  a  comparatively  short  spell  of 
monastic  retirement  he  was  called  back  to  politics  at  the  bidding 
of  Pope  Benedict,  and  sent  on  an  embassy  to  Constantinople 
as  papal  ambassador  (Apocrisiarius).  It  is  uncertain  how  long 
he  stayed  there,  but  in  the  course  of  his  sojourn  he  managed  to 
reconcile  Benedict's  successor,  Pelagius,  with  two  successive 
emperors,  Tiberius  and  Maurice,  with  whom  relations  had  been 
strained.  He  failed,  however,  in  the  other  object  of  his  mission, 
which  was  to  extract  aid  from  the  emperor  against  the  Lombards, 
from  whom  Rome  was  in  imminent  danger  of  unprecedented 

evil. 

Gregory  was  not  wholly  absorbed  in  his  diplomatic  errand. 
While  he  was  in  Constantinople,  he  engaged  in  a  characteristic 
controversy  with  one  Eutychius  on  the  Resurrection  body,  and 
wrote  at  the  solicitation  of  his  friends  a  remarkable  commentary 
on  Job.  But  the  "  Magna  Moralia  "  is  only  accidentally  a  com- 
mentary :  it  is  really  an  expression  in  fantastic  imagery  of 
Gregory's  own  views  on  the  moral  and  religious  problems  of  his 
age.^  It  is  an  ambitious  but  not  a  great  work,  either  from  the 
literary  or  the  theological  standpoint ;  he  had  no  knowledge  of 
any  of  the  Oriental  languages,  and  had  only  read  his  author  in 
the  garbled  Latin  version.  He  accepts  his  visionary  utterances 
as  literal  history,  and  the  beauty  of  his  language  never  so  much 
as  occurs  to  him.  But  it  is  the  work  of  a  gi-eat  man— simple 
enough  to  accept  great  teaching  with  unquestioning  faith,  and 
generous  enough  to  find  in  it  the  satisfaction  of  the  needs  of  the 
whole  world. 

Nor  was  the  inner  life  of  the  soul  neglected  in  the  stress  of 
ecclesiastical  politics.  With  the  little  company  of  friends  who 
had  followed  him  from  Rome,  he  used  to  hold  spiritual 
converse,  and  "  to  retire  to  their  society  from  the  constant  storm 
of  business  as  to  a  safe  port  bound  by  their  example,  as  by  an 
anchor-cable,  to  the  placid  shore  of  prayer".  It  was  no  divided 
allegiance  which  Gregory  gave  to  the  monastic  ideal:  he 
remained  a  monk  at  heart  from  no  merely  ascetic  motive,  nor 
was  he  driven  to  the  cloister  by  an  over-mastering  sense  of  the 
evil  of  the  world,  but  in  the  peace  of  contemplative  religion  he 
found  his  ideal  of  earthly  happiness  as  well  as  the  fullness  of 
mystical  joy.  And  yet  the  monastic  ideal  of  Gregory  is  no  less 
severe  than  that  of  Benedict  himself,  and  his  self-discipline  was 
Buflficiently  austere  at  times  to  endanger  his  life  and  permanently 
to  undermine  his  constitution.  When  on  his  return  from 
Constantinople  he  became  Abbot  of  his  beloved  St.  Andrews, 


40  A  SHORT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

his  discipline  would  seem  utterly  inhuman  if  it  were  not 
animated  by  the  same  spirit  of  love  which  marks  all  his 
dealings  with  men.  The  Gregory  who  condemns  the  monk 
Justus  to  a  lonely  deathbed  as  a  penance  for  secreting  three 
golden  coins  is  the  same  man  who  walks  graciously  through  the 
streets  of  Rome  distributing  alms,  and  with  whimsical  tenderness 
makes  the  famous  series  of  puns  suggested  by  the  sight  of  the 
Angle  children,  whose  angel  faces  inspired  him  to  work  for  the 
conversion  of  England.  Perhaps  the  noblest  impulse  of  his  life 
was  that  which  drew  him  away  from  the  monastery  which  he 
loved — away  from  the  city  which  hung  on  his  teaching  and 
already  rang  with  the  praises  of  his  piety — towards  the  heathen 
land  of  King  EAlle  which  was  to  be  reclaimed  "  De-ira "  and 
resound  with  "  Alleluiah  ".  A  popular  tumult  led  to  Gregory's 
return  under  the  compulsion  of  Pope  Pelagius,  after  three  days' 
journeying  towards  the  English  shore,  but  the  fact  that  he  never 
reached  the  kingdom  of  EAlle  does  not  detract  from  the 
splendour  of  his  self-oblation.  The  angel  boys  had  touched  the 
heart  as  well  as  the  imagination  of  Gregory,  and  the  mission  of 
Augustine,  which  was  in  truth  the  outcome  of  the  scene  in  the 
market-place,  immortalises  the  name  of  Gregory  in  the  history 
of  England. 

In  590,  Gregory  was  again  summoned  away  from  St.  Andrews 
by  the  world  which  could  not  spare  him  for  a  monk.  The  call 
this  time  was  to  the  Papacy  itself,  but  it  was  nearly  a  year  before 
Gregory  could  be  induced  to  submit  to  the  onerous  dignity  thus 
thrust  upon  him.  Some  such  reluctance  was  traditional — a  sort 
of  conventional  expression  of  humility  which  was  expected  of 
the  Bishop-designate  by  the  people  who  appointed  him.  It  was 
often  artificial  and  sometimes  ridiculous,  but  we  know  enough 
of  Gregory's  character  to  feel  certain  that  his  reluctance  was 
perfectly  sincere.  He  was  leaving  a  life  of  sheltered  retirement, 
congenial  to  his  extremely  sensitive  temperament,  for  an  oflQce 
of  unparallelled  danger  and  diflficulty.  To  him,  the  monastic 
life  brought  fullness  of  soul,  while  ecclesiastical  politics  meant 
contraction.  But  if  it  is  necessary  to  prove  that  no  hypocritical 
motives  marred  the  sincerity  of  Gregory's  unworldliness,  his 
attempt  to  intercept  the  document  applying  for  the  Emperor's 
confirmation  of  his  appointment,  and  to  substitute  for  it  his  own 
supplication  for  its  refusal,  ajffords  the  strongest  evidence  of  its 
genuine  character. 

Happily  for  the  history  of  the  Papacy,  Gregory  was  not  suc- 
cessful in  avoiding  the  pontificate.  Nor  when  once  enthroned 
did  he  fail  to  rise  to  his  immense  responsibilities;  he  left  the 


MORAL  SUPREMACY  41 

gracious  calm  of  St.  Andrews  behind  when  he  said  good-bye  to 
the  monastery,  and  he  put  ofif  the  monk  as  completely  as  he 
adopted  the  life  of  the  ecclesiastical  statesman :  but  he  never 
laid  aside  the  saint.  If  occasionally  he  looks  wistfully  back  at 
the  monastic  garden  among  the  oak-trees  of  the  Ccelian  Hill,  it 
is  not  with  the  haunting  regrets  of  a  man  who  has  failed  but 
with  the  heart-searchings  of  an  idealist  who  is  conscious  of  his 
limitations.  To  the  Emperor's  pious  sister,  he  writes  :  "  Under 
the  colour  of  the  episcopate  I  have  been  brought  back  to  the 
world.  ...  I  have  lost  the  joys  of  my  rest,  and  seem  to  have 
risen  outwardly,  while  inwardly  I  have  fallen.  I  lament  that 
I  am  driven  far  away  from  my  Maker's  face.  .  .  .  Though  for 
myself  I  fear  nothing,  I  am  greatly  afraid  for  those  who  have 
been  committed  to  me.  On  all  sides  I  am  tossed  by  the  waves 
of  business,  and  pressed  down  by  storms,  so  that  I  can  say  with 
truth,  'I  am  come  into  deep  waters  where  the  flood  overflows 
me'.  ...  I  loved  the  beauty  of  the  contemplative  life,  as  a 
Rachel,  barren,  but  beautiful  and  of  clear  vision,  which  though 
on  account  of  its  quietness  it  is  less  productive,  yet  has  a  finer 
perception  of  light.  But,  by  what  judgment  I  know  not,  Leah 
has  been  brought  to  me  in  the  night,  to  wit,  the  active  life, 
fertile  but  tender-eyed ;  seeing  less,  though  bringing  forth  more." 
In  a  dififerent  vein  he  expresses  the  same  consciousness  of  his 
own  deficiencies  in  answering  the  felicitations  of  a  friend.  "  It 
is  all  very  well  to  make  the  name  the  likeness  of  a  thing,"  he 
writes  in  affectionate  banter,  "  and  to  turn  neat  sentences  and 
pretty  speeches  in  your  letters,  and  to  call  a  monkey  a  lion ;  but 
it  is  just  the  same  thing  as  we  do  when  we  call  mangy  puppies 
pards  or  tigers." 

Gregory's  apparent  self-depreciation  was  the  logical  outcome 
of  his  extraordinarily  high  conception  of  the  papal  office  and 
his  absolute  conviction  in  the  reality  of  its  power.  It  was  less 
a  matter  of  legal  right  than  of  practical  expediency.  Times 
had  changed  since  Leo  had  found  it  necessary  to  insist  on  an 
extravagant  acknowledgment  of  St.  Peter's  claims :  no  one 
wanted  to  be  told  that  the  Pope  inherited  his  supremacy  from 
the  prince  of  the  Apostles,  for  everyone  knew  that  the  Pope  had 
saved  Rome  three  times  from  the  horrors  of  pillage,  and  stood 
between  the  Romans  and  Byzantine  tyranny.  So  Gregory  could 
afi^ord  to  be  less  exacting  than  Leo  in  demanding  the  explicit 
acknowledgment  of  papal  supremacy  just  in  so  far  as  his 
authority  was  a  greater  reality,  resting  on  a  more  definite  basis 
than  that  of  his  predecessors.  This  is  always  most  noticeable 
in  his  dealings  with  Constantinople,  and   a  striking  instance 


42  A  SHOET  HiSTOEt  OF  THE  PAPACY 

occurs  at  the  outset  of  his  pontificate.  The  new  Pope  had  an 
encounter  with  certain  Bishops  of  Istria,  who  had  refused  to 
condemn  the  Three  Chapters, — an  attitude  which  had  by  now 
come  to  be  regarded  as  unorthodox.  The  Emperor,  however,  in 
this  case,  chose  to  interfere  for  the  protection  of  the  Istrian 
Bishops,  and  commanded  the  Pope  to  withdraw  his  complaint. 
Gregory  instantly  submitted  in  deference  to  "the  commands  of 
the  most  pious  princes".  Again,  in  593,  Maurice  issued  an 
edict  forbidding  soldiers  to  become  monks  during  their  period 
of  office.  It  might  seem  a  wise  enough  provision  in  the  face  of 
the  deadly  peril  which  threatened  Rome  from  the  Lombards, 
but  it  must  have  been  directly  against  Gregory's  most  cherished 
convictions,  and  indeed  he  felt  it  sufficiently  strongly  to  send 
a  vehement  protest  to  Constantinople  while  at  the  same  time 
acquiescing  in  its  publication.  The  protest,  while  it  is  forcible 
and  severely  explicit,  is  expressed  in  words  which  are  almost 
servile :  "  What  am  I  who  speak  this  to  my  lords  but  dust  and 
a  worm  ?  Nevertheless,  feeling  that  this  law  is  against  God  the 
Author  of  all  things  I  cannot  be  silent."  It  has  to  be  remem- 
bered, however,  in  this  connection  and  in  others,  that  extrava- 
gant forms  of  address  to  princes  were  required  by  the  ordinary 
code  of  good  manners.  It  is  difficult  to  decide  exactly  how  far 
Gregory's  attitude  to  the  Emperor,  as  expressed  in  his  letter,  is 
merely  dictated  by  the  conformity  of  a  courtier  to  the  conven- 
tional phraseology  and  how  far  he  was  prompted  in  his  submis- 
sion on  the  various  points  at  issue  between  him  and  his  temporal 
lord  by  the  reverence  for  constituted  authority  which  monastic 
obedience  had  instilled. 

Unhappily,  neither  of  these  hypotheses  offers  any  solution  of 
the  one  inexplicable  blot  on  Gregory's  pontificate.  In  602,  the 
Emperor  Maurice  was  assassinated  with  wanton  cruelty  by  one 
of  the  worst  and  most  brutal  adventurers  who  ever  succeeded 
in  establishing  a  tyranny.  In  his  letter  of  congratulation  to 
Phocas,  Gregory  shows  the  only  sign  of  moral  deterioration  which 
his  contact  with  worldly  affairs  might  have  effected.  He  was 
growing  old,  and  the  consequences  of  his  early  asceticism  were 
telling  on  his  physique,  but  neither  bodily  weakness  nor  the 
heat  of  personal  rancour — for  he  had  never  been  on  very  good 
terms  with  Maurice — can  adequately  excuse  his  self-abasement 
before  the  red-handed  usurper.  "  Glory  to  God  in  the  highest, 
Who  as  it  is  written  changes  times  and  transfers  seasons,"  he 
ejaculates  at  the  opening  of  a  fulsome  eulogy,  in  which  he 
rejoices  that  "  the  Benignity  of  your  Piety  has  been  raised  to 
the  imperial  throne."    Of  course  Gregory  has  an  end  to  serve — 


MORAL  SUPREMACY  43 

a  boon  to  ask — for  the  glory  of  the  Papacy,  which  follows  closely 
on  the  phrases  of  adulation.  But  the  price  was  too  great :  the 
moral  example  of  one  of  the  greatest  of  the  Popes,  without  this 
one  deep  stain,  would  have  been  of  far  greater  worth  to  Christen- 
dom and  to  the  world  than  any  favour  which  it  was  in  the  power 
of  an  Emperor  to  grant. 

The  causes  which  had  embittered  Gregory  against  Maurice 
were  many  and  various.  Soon  after  the  edict  forbidding  soldiers 
to  become  monks,  Maurice  interfered  in  the  election  of  Maxi- 
mus,  Bishop  of  Salona,  in  Illyricum.  Gregory,  diplomatic  as 
ever,  gave  way  at  first,  allowed  the  election  of  Maximus,  and 
received  him  with  honour  at  the  Emperor's  request.  But,  at 
the  same  time,  he  appealed  to  the  Empress  Constantina,  and 
finally — seven  years  later — extorted  an  apology  and  submission 
from  the  troublesome  Bishop.  A  still  more  serious  affair  was 
the  quarrel  with  John  the  Faster,  the  Bishop  of  Constantinople, 
who  had  taken  on  himself  to  punish  two  heretic  priests  by  the 
uncanonical  penalty  of  flogging.  In  answer  to  Gregory's  pro- 
test, the  Bishop  feigned  ignorance  of  the  charges  brought 
against  him.  The  reply  of  Gregory  throws  a  new  light  on  his 
character,  and  illustrates  his  command  of  irony,  which  Dean 
Church  has  compared  to  that  of  Pio  Nono.  He  professes  to  be- 
lieve that  "someone  else,  a  secular  person"  had  addressed  him 
in  the  name  of  his  "  most  holy  brother ".  Then,  with  an 
ofifensiveness  which  the  delicacy  of  his  trained  wit  merely 
aggravates,  he  accuses  this  fictitious  scapegoat  of  malignantly 
lying,  quoting  the  text  intentionally  suggestive  of  the  epithet 
by  which  the  Bishop  was  known :  "  Not  that  which  goeth 
into  the  mouth  defileth  a  man,  but  that  which  cometh 
out  of  the  mouth  that  defileth  a  man ".  There  is  a  note 
of  personal  rancour  in  the  quarrel,  which,  in  itself,  sug- 
gests an  open  rivalry  between  Gregory  and  the  Bishop  of 
Constantinople.  In  595,  it  came  to  the  surface  in  a  direct 
clash  of  authority.  John  the  Faster  claimed  the  title  of 
"  Universal  Bishop,"  and  flaunted  it  in  a  document  addressed  to 
the  Pope.  Gregory  disputed  the  claim  with  all  the  vehemence 
of  his  passionate  nature.  He  takes  up  the  somewhat  astonish- 
ing standpoint  that  any  such  assumption  of  priority  on  the 
part  of  a  Bishop — even  the  Bishop  of  Rome — would  be  an  un- 
warrantable usurpation.  In  his  indignation  he  appeals  to  the 
Churches  of  Antioch  and  Alexandria,  claiming  that  if  there 
were  any  superiority  of  one  over  another  of  the  Bishops,  to 
them,  conjointly  with  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  it  ought  properly  to 
belong.     But  even  the  Pope,  he  alleges,  refuses  to  claim  such  a 


44  A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

title,  and  he  asks  the  poignant  question,  what  would  become  of 
the  whole  Church  if  it  depended  on  one  patriarch,  and  he  be- 
came a  heretic  ?  The  same  question  has  been  asked  in  more 
advanced  ages,  and  a  satisfactory  answer  is  still  hard  to  find. 

The  contest  is  one  of  great  interest,  for  it  shows  us  the  mind 
of  the  fourth  great  Father  of  Christendom  on  the  relative  im- 
portance of  the  Holy  See.  While  he  remains  firm  in  supporting 
a  certain  priority  in  dignity  to  the  Roman  See,  he  repudiates 
any  claim  to  be  set  as  it  were  on  a  higher  plane  than  his  brother 
patriarchs.  The  patriarchal  claims  he  accepts,  but  he  expressly 
shares  them  with  Alexandria  and  Antioch,  as  claiming  no  less 
than  Rome  to  have  been  "founded  on  the  Rock".  Thus 
Gregory  may  be  said  to  have  favoured  the  idea  of  a  limited 
Popedom,  lifted  above  the  clamour  of  rivalry,  and  yet  unim- 
perilled  by  the  dangerous  isolation  of  infallibility. 

The  quarrel  with  the  Bishop  of  Constantinople  was,  in  itself, 
enough  to  throw  Gregory  across  the  path  of  the  autocratic 
Emperor.  But  there  were  still  other  causes  of  greater  import- 
ance for  the  moment  which  produced  an  open  rupture.  Maurice 
had  at  last  awakened  to  the  fact  that  Italy  would  be  demolished 
by  the  Lombards  unless  something  was  done  immediately  to 
prevent  it.  A  military  expedition  was  out  of  the  question. 
Persia  was  pressing  hard  on  the  East,  and  new  Rome  must  be 
defended  at  the  expense  of  the  mother  city.  So  Maurice,  with 
doubtful  policy,  turned  to  the  Franks,  who,  by  a  century  of 
conquest,  had  consolidated  in  Gaul  a  powerful  kingdom  under 
the  enterprising  Merovingian  dynasty.  The  Franks,  nothing 
loath,  swept  down  across  the  Alps,  and  feasted  their  eyes  on  the 
rich  Lombard  plains.  But  the  peril  of  Rome  was  not  lessened  by 
the  introduction  of  fresh  barbarian  hordes,  and  Gregory  availed 
himself  of  the  accession  of  a  Catholic  Lombard  queen  to  make 
peace  with  her  husband,  King  Agilulf.  It  was  not  a  moment  to 
think  of  diplomatic  formality,  or  to  pause  for  higher  sanction : 
Ariulf,  Duke  of  Spoleto,  was  waiting  at  the  gates  of  Rome,  and 
the  situation  demanded  the  decisive  action  of  a  strong  man  with 
a  determined  will.  So  Gregory  made  peace  on  his  own  responsi- 
bility, and  induced  Ariulf  to  retire.  In  593,  the  exarch  Ro- 
manus  broke  the  treaty  which  had  been  made  without  his 
sanction,  and  Rome  was  once  more  besieged.  Gregory,  thwarted 
in  his  patriotic  efforts,  took  to  the  pulpit,  and  gave  utterance  to 
the  despair  which  he  could  no  longer  suppress — "  Let  us  end 
worldly  desires,  at  least  with  the  end  of  the  world,"  he  cries,  in 
the  belief  that  the  day  of  doom  was  at  hand.  "  Let  no  man 
blame  me  if  henceforth  I  speak  to  you  no  more;   for,  as  you 


MOEAL  SUPKEMACY  45 

all  see,  our  tribulations  have  increased,  we  are  everywhere 
surrounded  by  perils,  everywhere  is  imminent  danger  of 
death ;  some  return  to  us  with  their  hands  lopped  off,  others 
are  reported  to  us  as  captured  or  slain.  Now  am  I  forced 
to  refrain  my  tongue  from  exposition,  for  my  soul  is  weary 
of  life".  Tiie  tone  of  his  preaching  is,  however,  deceptive. 
Thwarted  by  the  exarch,  who  seems  to  have  had  private  ends 
to  serve  in  prolonging  the  war.  and  suspected  at  Constantinople 
of  "  simplicity,"  Gregory  still  struggled  to  obtain  some  mitigation 
of  the  sufferings  of  his  flock.  In  spite  of  an  offensive  letter 
from  Maurice,  which  extorted  a  stinging  reply  from  the  Pope, 
Gregory  left  no  stone  unturned  which  might  serve  the  cause  of 
peace.  Such  brief  spaces  of  respite  as  relieve  the  terrible  story 
of  the  Lombard  oppression  owe  their  origin  entirely  to  the 
unaided  efforts  and  the  dauntless  energy  of  Gregory.  By 
appealing  from  the  suspicious  Emperor  to  his  more  reasonable 
wife,  he  managed  to  conclude  a  truce  with  King  Agilulf  in  595, 
and  another  in  603,  again  through  the  agency  of  the  Catholic 
Queen  Theodolinda.  It  was  not  the  fault  of  the  Pope  that  peace 
was  not  established  on  a  firmer  basis  and  on  more  durable  lines. 
What  the  dualism  between  Byzantine  and  papal  rule  in  Italy 
made  it  impossible  to  achieve,  Gregory  successfully  contrived  in 
other  ways  and  by  other  means  to  bring  about.  He  wrote 
fatherly  letters  to  Theodolinda,  dealing  tenderly  with  her 
lingering  Arian  prejudices,  and  exhorting  her  to  strengthen  the 
conversion  of  Agilulf.  The  result  was  that  gradually  the  leaven 
of  orthodoxy  spread  from  the  royal  household  through  the  bar- 
barian ranks  of  the  Lombard  settlers,  till  the  bond  of  religious 
unity  paved  the  way  for  the  closer  bond  of  nationality  which 
finally  made  the  Teutonic  conquerors  one  with  the  Romans  in 
the  inseparable  union  of  race. 

For  all  these  things  history  acknowledges  its  debt  to  Gregory 
the  Great,  who  dignified  statecraft  by  his  loftiness  of  spirit,  and 
gave  to  the  Papacy  a  splendid  pattern  for  a  political  Pope.  But 
it  was  to  Gregory  the  saint,  the  "Pastor  Pastorum,"  that  the 
men  of  the  Middle  Ages  turned  with  affectionate  gratitude  when 
they  called  him  Father.  In  dealing  with  clerical  abuses,  he  keeps 
a  happy  mean  between  aggression  and  laxity.  He  spared  one  old 
Bishop  who  removed  his  neighbour's  landmark,  and  answered 
good-humouredly  the  excuses  of  another  who  had  been  accused 
of  living  too  well.  On  the  other  hand,  he  condemned  "  Simony  " 
wherever  he  detected  it  as  "the  first  and  worst  of  heresies," 
and  showed  uncompromising  severity  against  licence  and  im- 
morality among  the  Clergy.      It  is  not  difficult  to  understand 


46  A  SHOET  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

the  extraordinary  attraction  which  was  exercised  by  the  "  im- 
perious saint".  As  is  common  with  men  who  are  endowed 
with  singular  gifts  of  friendship,  he  made  great  demands  of  his 
fellows,  and  treated  them  in  return  with  extraordinary  con- 
sideration and  sympathy.  His  letters  to  Leander  of  Seville, 
his  most  intimate  friend,  are  simple  and  tender  and  full  of  good 
fellowship.  "  I  am  not  now,  good  man,  he  whom  you  used  to 
know,"  he  says,  in  disclaiming  the  affectionate  praises  of 
Leander — "  I  have  advanced  outwardly,  I  confess ;  but  inwardly 
I  have  fallen.  .  .  ,  Much  does  this  burdensome  honour  oppress 
me.  .  .  .  Now  am  I  tossed  with  waves  and  seek  the  plank  of 
thy  intercession,  that  though  not  accounted  worthy  to  come  rich 
with  my  ship  entire  to  shore,  I  may  at  anyrate  reach  it  on  a 
plank  after  loss."  But  the  friendship  between  Leander  and 
Gregory  had  a  political  importance  as  well,  for  it  was  through 
Leander  that  Gregory  bestowed  the  first  privileges  on  the 
Visigothic  Church,  on  which  was  founded  the  traditional  loyalty 
of  the  "  Most  Catholic  Kings  "  of  Spain. 

In  spite  of  his  somewhat  guarded  use  of  the  dogmatic 
claims  of  the  Papacy,  Gregory  has  no  hesitation  whatever  in 
exercising  his  control  over  the  Church  throughout  Europe.  He 
claimed  and  exercised  an  international  authority,  and,  to  an 
even  greater  extent  than  Leo,  created  the  tradition  of  a  spiritual 
Roman  Empire.  ■  His  relations  with  Gaul  form  in  themselves  a 
complete  department  of  his  policy,  and  his  correspondence  with 
Queen  Brunehild  shows  that  the  right  of  the  Pope  to  correct 
abuses,  to  arbitrate,  and  to  exercise  jurisdiction  was  recij^rocally 
acknowledged,  whereas  in  earlier  times  the  Merovingians  had 
not  dealt  too  tenderly  with  ecclesiastical  claims  in  Gaul. 
Distant  Ireland  laid  her  difficulties  before  him  in  at  least  one 
authentic  letter  from  her  Apostle,  St.  Columba.  The  mission 
of  Augustine  had  been  successful  beyond  all  belief  in  southern 
England,  and  the  seed  sown  in  the  slave-market  had  born  ample 
fruitage. 

But  absorbed  as  he  was  in  international  affairs,  Gregory  did 
not  neglect  his  own  immediate  responsibilities.  His  household 
was  carefully  superintended,  and  the  utmost  simplicity  preserved. 
The  Papacy  had  already  accumulated  a  large  quantity  of  land — 
the  patrimony  of  Peter,  as  it  came  to  be  called — and  in  its 
proper  administration  Gregory  expended  much  care  and  effort. 
He  was  always  careful  to  protect  the  peasant  and  the  poor 
farmer  from  undue  exactions,  and  minute  instructions  were 
issued  to  the  "  Defensores "  and  sub-deacons  to  whom  the 
actual  supervision  was  entrusted.     One  of  his  first  and  most 


MOKAL  SUPEEMACY  47 

detailed  letters,  after  becoming  Pope,  was  written  to  one  Peter, 
the  Sicilian  agent,  instructing  him  to  correct  certain  abuses 
which  had  crept  into  the  management  of  the  patrimony  in 
Sicily.  He  concludes  with  the  general  recommendation — "  So 
act  that  your  humility  may  never  be  grovelling  nor  your 
authority  overbeiring;  but  let  rectitude  give  a  flavour  to  your 
humility  and  humility  make  rectitude  itself  courteous  ".  The 
same  Peter  is  kept  well  up  to  the  mark  by  an  occasional  rebuke, 
which  is  often  veiled  in  the  ironical  eulogy  so  characteristic  of 
Gregory — "I  hear  from  the  Abbot  MarinianuF,"  he  writes,  "that 
the  building  in  the  Praetorian  monastery  is  not  yet  half  done ; 
what  shall  I  say  to  this  but  extol  the  ardour  of  your 
experience.  ...  I  hear,  too,  that  you  are  quite  aware  that 
certain  property  and  several  farms  really  belong  to  other 
people ;  but  that  through  the  representations  or  the  fear  of 
someone  or  other  you  are  afraid  to  restore  them.  If  you  were 
really  a  Christian,  you  would  fear  God's  judgments  rather  than 
man's  tattle.  Now  mind  what  I  say,  for  I  am  always  telling  you 
about  this.  .  .  .  Further,  you  have  sent  me  a  wretched  hack,  and 
five  good  donkeys.  The  hack  I  cannot  ride,  he  is  such  a  brute ; 
and  the  animals  that  are  good  I  cannot  mount,  because  they 
are  donkeys." 

Gregory's  enemies,  after  his  death,  murmured  against  him 
as  "  a  spendthrift  and  squanderer  of  the  manifold  treasures  of 
the  patriarchate,"  because  he  had  refused  to  tax  the  peasant 
with  the  same  cruel  rigour  that  his  predecessors  had  thought- 
lessly used,  and  because  he  distributed  lavishly  among  the  poor 
the  wealth  which  their  own  toil  had  produced.  They  even  went 
so  far  as  to  burn  his  books,  until  they  were  stopped  by  the 
courageous  entreaties  of  Peter  the  Deacon,  who  convinced 
them  of  their  folly  by  asserting  that  he  had  seen  the  Holy 
Sph'it  in  the  shape  of  a  dove  resting  on  Gregory's  head  as  he 
wrote. 

The  last  three  years  of  Gregory's  life  (601-4)  were  spent  in 
considerable  physical  suffering,  and  yet  he  was  as  active  as  ever 
in  political  life,  and  as  tenderly  considerate  to  his  friends.  To 
one  old  friend,  also  approaching  the  evening  of  life,  Marinianus, 
bishop  of  Ravenna,  he  writes  an  urgent  entreaty  to  take  care  of 
himself,  and,  if  possible,  to  come  and  stay  with  him,  that  he 
might  have  him  in  his  care.  Marinianus  and  Gregory  had 
been  fellow-monks  at  St.  Andrew's,  but,  on  Gregory's  promotion, 
they  had  quarrelled  over  a  question  of  ceremonial,  only  to  come 
together  again  in  old  age.  "  You  ought  to  come  to  me  before  the 
summer  season  that  I  may  personally,  as  far  as  I  can,  provide 


48  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY. 

for  your  sickness ;  since  the  physicians  say  that  the  summer- 
time is  peculiarly  unfavourable  to  your  complaint.  ...  I  too, 
who  see  myself  to  be  near  death,  if  it  shall  please  God  to  call 
me  before  you,  would  wish  to  pass  away  in  your  hands.  .  .  . 
Further,  I  neither  exhort  nor  admonish  you,  but  I  strictly  order 
you  not  to  presume  to  fast,  since  the  physicians  say  that  abstin- 
ence is  very  bad  for  your  complaint." 

From  such  letters  as  this,  the  extraordinary  lovableness  of 
Gregory's  character  invariably  stands  out.  In  his  famous 
"Liber  Pastoralis  Curse,"  which  was  cherished  by  the  Church 
throughout  Europe,  and  translated  200  years  later  by  our 
English  Alfred,  Gregory  gives  us  his  own  ideal  in  the  portrait  of 
the  faithful  priest,  who  is  both  "justly  compassionate  and 
affectionately  severe  ".  Personal  humility  is  to  be  the  key-note 
of  his  life,  and  strong  human  sympathy  the  token  of  his  calling. 
In  spite  of  his  own  protest — "  I  direct  others  to  the  shore  of 
perfection,  while  I  am  myself  still  tossed  among  the  waves  of 
faults " — we  cannot  but  feel  that  the  life  of  Gregory  identifies 
itself  very  closely  with  that  of  the  ideal  shepherd  of  his  Treatise. 

His  own  personal  religion  was  primitive  and  credulous,  and 
he  loved  to  give  it  expression  in  splendour  and  rich  symbolism. 
He  has  been  called  the  "Master  of  the  Ceremonies"  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  and  it  is  to  him  that  it  owes  much  of  the 
dignified  and  elaborate  ritual  which  expresses  bo  adequately  the 
magnificence  of  the  Catholic  idea.  The  severe  grandeur  of  the 
Gregorian  chant  was  first  taught  by  Gregory  to  the  choristers  of 
St.  Peter's,  and  in  his  organisation  of  the  Septiform  Litany 
originated  the  rich  pageantry  of  the  ecclesiastical  processions 
which  illuminate  the  darkest  pictures  of  the  Middle  Ages  with 
the  splendour  of  Christian  joy. 

Gregory  loved  richness  and  colour  for  its  own  sake,  whether 
in  the  wings  of  an  angel  or  the  glow  of  a  procession,  with  the 
true  Italian  delight  in  brilliance  and  warmth.  In  his  book  of 
"  Dialogues,"  written  for  the  edification  of  the  Lombard  Court, 
he  accumulated  an  amazing  collection  of  legends  of  a  more  or 
less  miraculous  nature,  some  of  which  are  full  of  imaginative 
beauty,  and  others  of  the  simplicity  of  truth,  while  many  are 
almost  grotesque  in  their  far-fetched  absurdity.  But  there  is 
little  justice  or  insight  in  the  criticism  which  sees  in  Gregory's 
"  superstition  "  a  moral  defect ;  in  him  the  poet  and  the  mystic 
were  inextricably  interwoven,  and  there  is,  after  all,  no  very 
sharp  dividing  line  between  the  man  who  sees  miracles  in  every- 
day  life  and  the  man  who  sees  in  everyday  life  a  miracle. 


PART  II 
THE  DARK  AGES 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE  BREACH  BETWEEN  EAST  AND  WEST 

Part  I. — The  Opening  of  the  Breach,  a.d.  604-701 

THE  achievement  of  Gregory  the  Great  was  not  of  such  a 
character  as  to  obtain  instant  recognition.  It  is  not  in 
the  time  of  its  young  ambition  and  untested  strength 
that  a  great  institution  is  apt  to  pay  its  debts,  and  it  needed 
more  than  a  century  of  strife  and  a  series  of  political  crises  to 
prove  the  stability  of  the  foundation  of  papal  power  before  the 
gratitude  due  to  the  greatest  of  its  founders  was  recognised.  In 
the  great  struggle  of  the  next  two  centuries,  when  East  and 
West  stood  face  to  face,  and  the  Popes  fought  their  way  to  the 
unique  position  which  they  hold  in  history,  the  militant  bishops 
had  cause  enough  to  praise  the  memory  of  him  who  had  paved 
the  way  to  victory  by  establishing  the  Papacy  as  a  moral  and 
political  power  throughout  Europe. 

Very  little  is  known  of  Gregory's  immediate  successors,  and 
there  is  no  sign  at  first  of  the  gathering  storm-clouds.  The 
East  was  absorbed  in  its  Persian  wars,  and  Phocas  spent  all  the 
energy  of  which  he  was  capable  in  thwarting  conspiracies  against 
his  life  and  devising  ingenious  methods  of  punishment  for  the 
opponents  of  his  tyranny.  Such  relations  with  Byzantium  as 
come  to  light  in  the  obscurity  of  the  papal  annals  are  of  a 
friendly  nature.  Boniface  III.  in  his  single  year  of  office 
obtained  recognition  from  the  Emperor  of  the  title  of  Apostolic 
Head  of  Christendom,  and  Boniface  IV.  received  a  more  sub- 
stantial earnest  of  imperial  goodwill  in  the  gift  of  the  Pantheon. 
In  the  dedication  of  the  shrine  of  Cybele  and  all  the  gods  to  St. 
Mary  and  all  the  Saints  is  symbolised  both  the  antagonism  and 
the  continuity  of  Rome's  two  histories.  Boniface  and  his  clergy 
might  sprinkle  the  walls  of  the  pagan  Church  with  holy  water, 
and  their  Gloria  in  Excelsis  cleave  the  sky  through  the  opening 
in  the  vaulted  roof,  but  the  deposed  deities  still  lingered  on  in 
the  minds  of  the  Christian  worshippers  as  demons  and  evil 
spirits,  and  the  Queen  of  Heaven  inherited  no  small  part  of 
her  honour  from  the  tradition  of  Athene.      Even  so  did  the 

51 


52  A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

imperial  past,  more  powerful  now  than  in  the  days  when  the 
old  empire  was  dying,  survive  in  the  idea  of  spiritual  dominion, 
and  take  new  form  ere  long  at  the  coronation  of  the  first  medi- 
aeval emperor. 

Tranquillity  outlasted  the  reigns  of  Deusdedit  (615-618)  and 
Honorius  I.  (625-638),  though  signs  were  not  wanting  of  the 
discord  to  come.  The  overthrow  of  Phocas  by  the  more  worthy 
usurper  Heraclius  was  the  signal  for  the  first  of  a  long  series  of 
risings  in  Ravenna  against  the  Byzantine  government,  which 
co\ild  no  longer  keep  effective  control  over  the  exarchate.  But 
Deusdedit  held  aloof,  and  it  is  significant  that  in  this  early 
phase  of  the  struggle  there  is  no  trace  of  any  preconcerted 
attempt  at  independence  on  the  part  of  the  popes.  Honorius 
I.,  the  ablest  of  Gregory's  immediate  successors,  occupied  him- 
self in  maintaining  the  Lombard  peace  and  adorning  the  city 
with  a  new  basilica,  without  a  thought  of  political  strife.  His 
successors  condemned  him  for  his  diplomatic  lenity  towards 
the  Monothelite  heresy,  which  had  found  favour  at  the  Imperial 
Court.  Monothelitism  was  an  offshoot  of  the  Monophysite  struggle 
which  had  raged  in  earlier  generations.  Heraclius  saw  in  the 
doctrine,  which  taught  that  in  Christ  there  existed  not  one 
nature  but  one  will,  a  convenient  compromise  between  the  con- 
flicting schools  of  thought,  whose  contentions  had  for  so  long 
distracted  the  empire.  In  638  he  issued  his  Ecthesis,  a  mani- 
fseto  in  favour  of  Monothelitism,  and  sent  it  to  Rome  for  the 
Bishop's  acceptance.  Pope  Severinus  refused  to  comply,  and  in 
consequence  had  to  see  the  troops  of  the  exarch  sack  the  papal 
treasury  after  besieging  the  Lateran  for  three  days  to  shake  his 
obstinacy.  His  successor,  Theodore  (642-649),  although  himself  a 
Greek,  was  even  more  violently  opposed  to  the  Ecthesis,  which 
he  regarded  as  a  dishonest  quibble  on  a  vital  dilemma.  He 
avoided  direct  hostilities,  and  stood  aloof  from  the  rebellion  of 
Maurice  the  Chartular,  who  had  raised  all  the  classes  of  Rome 
in  political  rebellion  against  the  Emperor.  The  Pope  preferred 
to  confine  the  contest  to  the  doctrinal  sphere, — if  indeed  other 
motives  for  revolt  appealed  to  him  at  all,  which  is  very  doubt- 
ful. He  therefore  confined  himself  to  the  patronage  of  the  dis- 
reputable ex-patriarch  Pyrrhus,  who  was  expelled  from  his 
patriarchate  for  supposed  connivance  in  the  murder  of  the  son 
of  Heraclius.  Being  supplanted  in  his  patriarchate  by  another 
Monothelite,  Pyrrhus  found  it  convenient  to  abjure  the  heresy 
at  the  feet  of  the  Pope,  until  the  death  of  his  supplanter  and  the 
accession  of  a  tolerant  emperor  made  it  expedient  to  apostatize 
once   more.     Theodore's    terrible    anathema,   signed  with    the 


THE  BREACH  BETWEEN  EAST  AND  WEST      53 

blood  of  Christ,  followed  the  renegade  to  the  Imperial  Court, 
where  Constans  II.  was  on  the  point  of  issuing  his  Type,  or  edict 
of  pacification,  forbidding  all  further  dispute  on  the  subject  of 
the  One  Nature  and  the  One  Will. 

The  storm  aroused  by  the  Ecthesis  was  as  nothing  compared 
with  that  evoked  by  the  Type.  The  heroic  Pope  Martin,  con- 
vinced in  his  own  cause  and  its  consummate  importance,  sum- 
moned a  Council  of  fifteen  Bishops  to  condemn  the  offensive 
document,  in  defiance  of  the  presence  of  the  exarch,  with 
imperial  troops  at  his  back,  and  Emperor's  mandate  to  support 
him  in  enforcing  his  will.  But  the  soldiery  was  by  now  national 
and  Roman,  and  the  exarch,  baffled  in  his  first  attempt  to 
coerce  the  Pope,  retired  to  Naples,  where,  according  to  papal 
historians,  he  repented  and  died.  Another  exarch  was  sent  in 
653  with  more  rigorous  authority  and  a  larger  imperial  con- 
tingent. Martin  feigned  illness  and  at  first  refused  to  see  the 
exarch.  But  on  the  next  day,  the  exarch  forced  an  entry  to 
the  Lateran,  and  read  an  imperial  decree  of  deposition  against 
Martin  as  he  lay  on  his  couch  before  the  High  Altar.  In  vain 
the  Pope  retaliated  with  anathema,  in  vain  his  clergy  rallied 
round  to  defend  him  from  the  armed  force  of  the  exarch.  The 
soldiers  struck  the  lights  off  the  Altar,  and  in  the  confusion 
which  followed,  carried  the  Pope  away  to  the  Palace  of  the 
Caesars,  whence  he  was  conveyed  by  sea  to  Constantinople. 
His  subsequent  treatment  at  the  hands  of  the  Emperor  falls 
little  short  of  martyrdom.  Submitted  to  an  ill-treatment  which 
evoked  the  pity  of  his  enemies,  he  was  tried  on  a  series  of 
manufactured  charges,  and  finally  condemned  to  banishment  in 
the  Chersonese.  With  his  clothes  in  rags  and  a  chain  attached 
to  his  neck,  he  set  out  for  his  place  of  exile,  where  he  died  two 
years  afterwards,  deserted  by  his  friends  to  whom  he  makes 
piteous  appeals  for  alms,  complaining  that  "  they  have  forgotten 
my  miseries,  and  do  not  care  to  know  whether  I  am  alive  or 
dead  '. 

A  still  deeper  humiliation  was  in  store,  before  the  Papacy 
was  to  emerge  from  its  subjection.  In  662,  the  restless  Emperor 
Constans  II.  set  out  on  a  visit  to  Italy,  with  a  view  to  effecting 
the  belated  recovery  of  his  dominions  in  South  Italy,  and  the 
subjugation  of  the  Pope  Vitalian.  Chased  by  the  ghost  of  his 
murdered  brother,  the  hapless  Emperor  advanced  to  Benevento, 
where  he  was  defeated  by  the  Lombard  princeling  Romuald. 
On  the  sixth  milestone  along  the  Appian  way,  with  every  outward 
sign  of  deferential  cordiality,  the  Pope  received  the  Imperial 
wanderer,  who  came  as  a  guest  to  his  own  city.     Stranger  and 


54     A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

brief  sojourner  as  he  was,  he  lost  no  time  in  making  good  his 
possession.  Abject  humiliation  was  exacted  from  the  Pope,  and 
the  cost  of  entertaining  the  Emperor  and  his  luxurious  Byzantine 
suite  was  defrayed  by  the  Papal  Treasury.  The  city,  too,  paid  its 
tribute  in  the  surrender  of  its  bronze  statues  and  the  spoliation 
of  the  tiles  of  gilt  bronze  which  adorned  the  roof  of  the  Pantheon. 
These  and  other  treasures  were  carried  away  by  Constans,  when 
at  last  he  relieved  Rome  of  his  presence  to  visit  Naples  and 
Sicily.  At  Syracuse,  four  years  later,  he  met  a  coward's  death  at 
the  hand  of  a  slave,  leaving  the  spoils  of  Rome  to  fall  into  the 
hands  of  the  Saracen  conquerors  of  the  island. 

The  visit  of  Constans  II.  is  the  darkest  moment  for  the 
Papacy  in  the  long  period  of  struggle  with  the  East.  From  the 
moment  of  his  departure  the  clouds  begin  to  lift. 

In  the  time  of  Pope  Donus  (676-678)  the  new  Emperor  Con- 
stantine  Pogonatus  declared  himself  in  favour  of  the  Papacy. 
His  predecessor  had  encouraged  the  Archbishop  of  Ravenna  to 
throw  off  the  supremacy  of  the  Roman  Bishop,  and  granted  to 
the  Exarchate  complete  immunity  from  papal  control.  The  new 
Emperor  cancelled  these  privileges  and  insisted  on  the  con- 
secration of  the  existing  Archbishop  by  Pope  Agathon  (678-682). 
Thus  the  supremacy  of  the  Pope  in  the  West  was  acknowledged 
and  enforced  by  the  Emperor  himself.  In  680  the  Papacy  gained 
a  still  more  important  victory  at  Constantinople  itself,  by  the 
final  overthrow  of  Monothelitism  at  the  sixth  OEcumenical 
Council.  Three  bishops  and  three  legates  represented  the 
Bishop  of  Rome,  and  it  is  a  sign  of  the  times  that  Agathon 
apologises  for  his  representatives'  lack  of  culture,  on  the  plea 
that  they  had  been  forced  to  earn  their  living  by  manual 
labour,  owing  to  the  poverty  of  Italy. 

The  friendship  between  the  Emperor  and  the  Pope  was  how- 
ever fictitious,  and  the  pontificate  of  Sergius  (687-701)  brought 
to  light  the  truth  of  which  the  whole  of  mediaeval  history  is  an 
illustration — that  the  existence  of  two  such  principles  as  those 
which  the  Empire  and  the  Papacy  represent  is  inconsistent  on 
any  other  basis  than  that  of  a  normal  antagonism.  The  trouble 
arose  on  the  refusal  of  Sergius  to  ratify  a  canon  of  discipline 
passed  by  the  Trullan  Synod  at  Constantinople.  The  Emperor 
tried  to  reinact  the  tragedy  of  Pope  Martin :  he  summoned  the 
Pope  to  Constantinople,  and  sent  his  envoy  to  fetch  him.  But 
he  miscalculated  the  effects  which  the  earlier  humiliation  of  the 
Popes  had  produced.  Not  only  Rome,  but  the  whole  of  imperial 
Italy  stood  by  the  Pope.  The  armies  of  Ravenna  and  Pentapolis 
followed  the  envoy  to  Rorne,  where  he  found  himself  in  the 


THE  BKEACH  BETWEEN  EAST  AND  WEST     55 

ignominious  plight  of  a  fugitive  at  the  mercy  of  Sergius.  He 
was  obliged  to  hide  in  the  Lateran  while  the  Pope  quelled  the 
tumult  which  his  coming  had  caused,  and  i&nally  he  took  refuge 
in  flight,  amid  the  jeers  of  the  derisive  Romans. 

Thus  in  the  victory  of  Sergius  the  wrongs  of  Martin  were 
avenged,  just  as  in  subsequent  generations  the  drama  of  Canossa 
was  expatiated  at  Anagni.  Already  it  was  evident  that  tem- 
poral and  spiritual  overlordship  could  not  coexist  as  separate  and 
equal  prerogatives  held  by  distinct  individuals.  A  weak  Pope 
would  always  have  to  submit  to  a  strong  Emperor,  as  Martin  and 
Vitalian  had  submitted  to  the  tyrant  Constans;  on  the  other 
hand,  bishops  would  not  be  wanting  of  the  ability  and  energy  of 
Sergius,  powerful  enough  to  assert  the  supremacy  of  their  spiritual 
prerogative. 

Temporal  and  spiritual  power  might  exist  side  by  side  in  the 
same  universe :  sun  and  moon — to  use  the  canonists'  metaphor 
— might  shine  together  in  the  same  heaven.  But  the  one  must 
outshine  the  other ;  the  sun  prevails,  and  we  call  it  day ;  or  the 
moon  shines  out  before  the  retreating  sun,  forming  the  night. 

If  this  had  been  realised  while  the  opposition  to  papal  supre- 
macy came  from  the  worn-out  eastern  empire,  before  the  birth  of 
the  vigorous  Germanic  institution,  the  history  of  the  Papacy  would 
have  been  much  less  interesting,  free  from  much  that  is  sordid, 
and  bereft  of  its  largest  opportunities. 


Part  II. — The  Widening  of  the  Gulf,  a.d.  704-741 

The  story  of  the  seventh  century  would  be  incomplete  with- 
out a  reference  to  the  custom  of  pilgrimage,  which  grew  up  at 
this  time. 

The  profound  reverence  of  royal  converts,  such  as  Cadwalla 
of  Mercia,  when  he  came  to  receive  baptism  at  the  hands  of 
Sergius  in  689,  must  have  made  a  striking  impression  on  the 
Romans,  distracted  as  they  were  between  their  quarrels  with 
Byzantium  and  their  perpetual  dread  of  the  Lombards.  Their 
city,  which  the  ravages  of  plague  and  famine  had  reduced  to  a 
conglomeration  of  poverty-stricken  hamlets  scattered  amongst 
ghost-haunted  ruins,  was  still  the  desire  of  nations.  Travellers 
came  and  went,  falling  on  their  knees  as  they  approached  her 
gates,  and  leaving  their  gifts  at  her  shrines  ere  they  went  their 
way,  to  tell  of  her  beauty  and  spread  abroad  the  wonder  of  her 
fame.  Others,  more  deeply  stirred  by  the  spell  of  that  super- 
natural charm  which  every  generation  has  confessed,  entered  the 


56  A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

city  never  to  return.  Thus  did  Coenrad  of  Mercia  and  Ofifa  of 
Essex,  who,  twenty  years  later  than  the  baptism  of  Cadwalla, 
forsook  their  own  people  and  their  royal  estate,  to  tread  as  monks 
the  holy  ground  of  the  eternal  city. 

Meanwhile  Popes  John  VI.  (701-705)  and  John  VII.  (705-707) 
maintained  the  passive  resistance  which  had  become  the  tradi- 
tional papal  policy  towards  Byzantium.  They  negotiated  inde- 
pendently with  the  Lombards,  and  refused  to  ratify,  while  they 
avoided  condemning,  the  Trullan  canon.  Pope  Constantine  (708- 
715),  the  "  last  of  the  subject  Popes,"  adopted  a  more  reactionary 
attitude.  He  visited  Constantinople,  and  kept  on  excellent  terms 
with  the  Emperor  at  the  expense  of  the  papal  principle.  But  his 
attitude  was  by  now  in  no  way  representative  of  popular  feeling 
and  the  Byzantine  yoke  was  never  more  resented  than  at  the 
moment  of  the  papal  alliance.  A  punitive  expedition  against 
Ravenna  in  709  increased  the  anti-imperial  hostility,  and  on  the 
overthrow  of  Justinian  II.  by  Philippicus  Bardanes  led  to  a  more 
serious  revolt  both  in  Romagna  and  in  Rome.  All  that  was  now 
needed  to  complete  the  work  of  the  seventh  century  was  some 
great  unifying  principle  of  opposition — a  casus  belli  which  should 
draw  together  the  various  units  of  disaffection — the  clergy,  with 
their  wounded  orthodoxy,  the  nobility,  insulted  by  the  vaunted 
luxury  of  the  Byzantine  courtiers,  the  ill-paid  army  and  the  dis- 
affected populace-sunder  the  leadership  of  a  national  pope.  The 
opportunity  came  at  last  in  the  great  iconoclastic  struggle,  in 
which  the  accumulated  grievances  of  the  four  centuries  since  the 
foundation  of  Constantinople  found  vent. 

In  715,  Gregory  II.  was  raised  to  the  Pontificate— a  Roman 
in  whom  was  combined  the  evangelising  zeal  of  his  forerunner 
and  namesake,  and  the  ambition  of  Leo  without  the  greater 
Gregory's  spiritual  insight,  or  the  sagacity  of  the  first  Great 
Pope.  Resolute  in  defence,  and  courageous  in  attack,  he  was, 
however,  a  worthy  antagonist  of  Leo,  the  Isaurian,  the  ablest 
and  least  criminal  of  Byzantine  usurpers.  For  ten  years  there 
was  peace,  while  Leo  consolidated  his  empire,  and  Gregory,  with 
difficulty,  staved  off  a  Lombard  attack,  and  rebuilt  the  Roman 
walls  as  a  precaution.  But  in  726,  the  Emperor,  unable  to 
resist  the  fascination  of  religious  controversy,  startled  Christen- 
dom by  his  first  edict  against  the  worship  of  images.  It  is  not 
improbable  that  Leo  was  actuated  throughout  the  controversy 
by  a  disinterested  desire  to  purify  the  Christian  religion.  Super- 
stition had,  no  doubt,  thrown  a  veil  over  the  mind  of  the  Church 
in  East  and  West  alike,  and  obscured  its  clarity  of  vision.  Mo- 
hammedan insurgents  derided  their  opponents  with  having  ex- 


THE  BREACH  BETWEEN  EAST  AND  WEST      57 

changed  one  form  of  Pantheism  for  another — the  worship  of 
the  heavens  for  the  idolatory  of  the  saints ;  and  when  we  are 
confronted  in  the  records  with  the  countless  pictures  of  Christ 
"  not  made  with  hands,"  and  innumerable  statues  of  the  Virgin 
endowed  with  inconceivable  virtues  of  healing  and  forgiveness, 
there  seems  only  too  much  truth  in  the  charge.  It  is  not  for 
his  aims  but  for  his  methods  that  Leo  must  be  condemned, 
and  the  failure  of  his  efforts  was  due  to  the  process  by  which 
he  sought  to  carry  them  out.  Iconoclasm  has  been  aptly  de- 
scribed as  "  a  premature  rationalism,  enforced  upon  an  unreason- 
ing age — an  attempt  to  spiritualise  by  law  and  edict  a 
generation  which  had  been  unspiritualised  by  centuries  of 
materialistic  devotion  "  (Milman). 

The  first  edict  was  followed  by  an  earthquake  in  the  ^gean, 
which  the  outraged  devotees  interpreted  as  Divine  vengeance  on 
the  Emperor's  sacrilege.  Leo,  however,  not  above  superstitious 
qualms,  saw  in  it  a  rebuke  for  his  own  half-measures,  and 
promptly  issued  a  second  edict,  ordering  the  destruction  of  the 
images,  which  the  former  decree  had  proved  powerless  to  rob  of 
their  veneration.  The  effect  was  an  instantaneous  and  open 
rebellion.  An  officer  executing  the  destruction  of  a  popular 
Crucifix  with  unnecessary  outrage,  was  beaten  to  death  by  the 
women  of  Constantinople.  An  armed  force  charged  the  resisting 
mob  in  the  streets  of  new  Rome,  while  rebellion  reigned  in  the 
islands  and  on  the  coast  of  the  iEgean. 

In  the  West,  meanwhile,  all  semblance  of  loyalty  was  thrown 
to  the  winds :  the  Pope  hurled  defiance,  and  Rome  threatened 
to  elect  a  new  Emperor  of  the  West.  Naples  assassinated  its 
Duke,  and  Ravenna  expelled  its  exarch.  Only  the  Lombard 
king  kept  his  head,  and  took  advantage  of  the  universal  con- 
fusion to  achieve  the  conquest  of  Ravenna — the  long-deferred 
hope  of  Lombard  aggression  since  the  foundation  of  the  kingdom. 

Gregory,  in  alarm,  turned  to  Venice,  with  whose  help  Ravenna 
was  re-taken,  for  of  the  two  hostile  forces  which  menaced  him, 
that  of  the  energetic  Lombard  king  Liutprand  was  certainly 
the  more  dangerous.  Indeed,  between  the  forces  of  the  icono- 
clasts, under  the  exarch  Eutychius,  and  the  importunate  over- 
tui'es  of  Liutprand,  the  poor  Pope  was  in  a  considerable  dilemma, 
and  it  is  hardly  surprising  that  his  remonstrances  with  the  Em- 
peror should  show  more  agitation  than  argument,  and  more  com- 
mand of  incriminating  invective  than  of  dignified  self-restraint. 
"  These  are  coarse  and  rude  arguments,"  he  writes,  with  some 
truth,  "  suited  to  a  coarse  and  rude  mind,  such  as  yours,  but 
they  contain  the  truth."     His  letter  is  not  a  very  favourable 


68  A  SHOET  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

specimen  of  a  papal  document ;  threats  which  he  never  meant 
to  carry  out  alternate  with  abuses  which  are  more  bombastic 
than  forcible,  and  his  biblical  analogies  are  apt  to  lose  force 
from  their  inaccurate  application.  But  it  must  be  remembered 
that  rumours  of  plots  against  his  life  rang  in  the  Pope's  ears  as 
he  wrote ;  the  exarch's  legions  lay  encamped  before  the  walls 
of  Rome,  while  in  the  distance  Liutprand  was  drawing  nearer, 
with  all  the  Lombard  forces  at  his  back.  It  is  true  that  the 
rest  of  Italy  drew  together  in  defence  of  the  Pope ;  that  the 
Romans  had  bound  themselves  by  a  solemn  oath  to  live  and  die 
in  saving  him.  But  ultimately  Gregory  knew  that  no  power 
could  deliver  him  from  the  hand  of  one  or  other  of  his  enemies, 
and  of  the  two,  Byzantium  as  the  most  distant  was  the  least  to 
be  feared.  Foreseeing  his  dilemma,  he  had  followed  up  his 
first  letter  with  another  more  conciliatory  document  which  is 
notable  as  containing  the  first  papal  attempt  to  distinguish  be- 
tween the  two  spheres  of  temporal  and  spiritual  government — 
"  the  powers  of  the  palace  and  of  the  Church  "  as  he  defines 
them.  But  the  conception  was  too  new  to  ruffle  the  serenity  of 
the  Emperor,  who  disposes  of  it  with  the  simple  assertion — "  I 
am  Emperor  and  I  am  priest ". 

Such  was  the  situation  in  729,  and  never  was  there  a  moment 
in  papal  history  on  which  more  vital  issues  depended.  One 
last  desperate  appeal  to  Charles  Martel,  the  hero  of  the  Prank- 
ish nation,  one  final  attempt  to  stir  up  rebellion  in  the  Lom- 
bard dominions,  and  the  Pope,  inspired  by  the  noblest  examples 
of  papal  heroism,  set  out  in  the  spirit  of  Leo  for  the  Lombard 
camp.  The  invincible  Liutprand  sank  on  his  knees  before  the 
defenceless  Gregory,  and  sufi'ered  himself  to  be  led  to  the  tomb 
of  St.  Peter.  Here,  in  lowliest  self-abasement,  he  surrendered 
the  ambitions  which  he  had  brought  so  near  to  realisation,  and 
won  in  return  for  himself  and  the  exarch  the  priestly  pardon 
for  which  no  price  seemed  too  high  to  pay. 

Soon  after  the  withdrawal  of  Liutprand,  Gregory  died,  but 
not  before  he  had  proved  his  willingness  to  maintain  the  Imperial 
authority  by  the  suppression  of  a  popular  rebellion  against  Leo 
in  730. 

By  his  energy  and  courage,  Gregory  II.  had  secured  the  first 
step  in  the  direction  of  temporal  independence  :  to  his  successor, 
Gregory  III.,  it  remained  to  follow  in  his  steps.  Obviously  the 
first  thing  required  of  the  new  Pope  was  to  define  his  attitude 
towards  iconoclasm.  Accordingly,  he  sent  an  embassy  in  731, 
with  a  message  to  the  Emperor  couched  in  such  uncompromising 
language  that  the  presbyter  who  was  charged  with  it  lacked  the 


THE  BKEACH  BETWEEN  EAST  AND  WEST      59 

courage  to  deliver  it.  His  next  step  was  to  summon  a  Council 
in  Rome,  which  passed  a  decree  of  defiance;  but  this  document, 
like  the  earlier  message,  failed  to  reach  the  Imperial  Court, 
owing  to  the  arrest  and  imprisonment  of  the  bearer  in  Sicily. 
The  Emperor  refused  to  receive  communications  of  which  the 
gist  was  too  well  known  to  him,  but  he  must  have  heard  with 
concern  of  the  influx  of  new  images,  splendidly  mounted  on 
marble  and  silver  pillars,  which  Gregory  had  ordered  for  the 
adornment  of  St.  Peter's.  Then  followed  a  war  of  reprisals. 
The  Emperor  sent  a  fleet  to  Italy  with  a  view  to  reclaiming  his 
own,  but  it  foundered  off  the  coast  of  Calabria.  To  indemnify 
himself  he  seized  Church  possessions  in  Sicily  and  Calabria,  thus 
confiscating  property  which  brought  the  Pope  35,000  gold  pieces 
a  year.  The  Pope  in  retaliation  annexed  Gallese  in  Tuscany  "to 
the  Holy  Republic  and  the  Roman  Army,"  by  a  secret  treaty  with 
the  Duke  of  Spoleto,  who  relied  on  the  papal  alliance  as  a  means 
of  throwing  oflf  his  allegiance  to  his  suzerain  Liutprand.  This, 
of  coiu-se,  provoked  war  with  the  Lombard  king,  who  seized 
four  cities  of  the  Roman  Duchy  and  prepared  for  further  attack. 
Once  more  the  Papacy  was  exposed  to  the  perils  of  a  three- 
cornered  struggle,  and  once  more  the  Pope  turned  his  eyes  to  the 
well-tried  v^alour  of  the  Frankish  nation,  whence  alone  deliver- 
ance could  come.  Unfortunately  for  Gregory,  an  hereditary 
alliance  already  existed  between  the  Lombard  kingdom  and  the 
Frankish  Mayors  of  the  Palace,  the  de  facto  rulers  of  France,  who 
by  their  energy  and  valour  had  already  supplanted  the  old 
Merovingian  dynasty  in  all  but  name.  In  vain  Gregory 
besought  Charles  Mart  el  in  panic-stricken  appeals  "  not  to 
close  his  ears  against  his  supplications,  lest  St.  Peter  close 
against  him  the  gates  of  Heaven  ".  In  vain  he  appealed  to  the 
pride  of  the  hero  of  Tours,  quoting  the  Lombard  taunt,  "Let 
him  come,  this  Charles,  with  his  army  of  Franks ;  let  him,  if  he 
can,  rescue  you  out  of  our  hands  ".  Even  the  gift  of  the  keys  of 
St.  Peter's  tomb  and  the  filings  from  the  Apostle's  chains  failed 
to  shake  the  friendship  of  the  Frank  for  his  old  friend  and  ally. 
Charles  deplored  the  situation,  but  his  Frankish  honour  forbade 
him  to  alleviate  it :  death  alone  removed  the  tension  which  in 
741  held  the  Papacy  in  suspense.  In  the  same  year  died  three 
great  men  :  first,  Leo  the  Isaurian — the  last  Emperor  who  strove 
to  make  his  power  in  Italy  a  reality ;  then  Charles  Martel,  who 
had  stemmed  the  tide  of  Saracen  conquest  and  delivered  France 
from  the  infidel  at  Poictiers ;  and  lastly.  Pope  Gregory  III.,  the 
founder  of  the  Frankish  alliance,  which  holds  so  momentous  a 
place  in  papal  history. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

THE  APPEAL  TO  THE  FRANKS,  AND  THE  REVIVAL  OF  THE 
WESTERN  EMPIRE,  a.d.  741-800 

IT  is  to  the  credit  of  Pope  Zacharius  (742-752)  that  he  took 
advantage  of  the  changes  which  the  year  741  had  made  in 
the  protagonists  of  the  European  struggle  to  introduce  a 
policy  of  peace.  A  treaty  with  Liutprand,  followed  up  by  two 
personal  interviews,  created  a  twenty  years'  truce  between  the 
Papacy  and  the  Lombard  kingdom.  Awed  by  the  presence  of 
the  Pope  in  his  own  capital,  and  moved  by  his  eloquence, 
Liutprand  gave  way  to  the  papal  demands,  which  included 
nothing  less  than  the  restoration  of  all  Liutprand's  conquests 
from  the  Greek  Emperor.  Having  thus  undone  in  his  last  hour 
by  a  single  generous  impulse  the  work  of  a  long  and  energetic 
career,  the  Lombard  king,  of  whom  none  but  his  enemies  the 
popes  had  ever  spoken  ill,  ended  his  days  in  peace. 

The  peace  policy  of  Zacharius  began  with  the  Lombards,  but 
spread  ere  long  to  Constantinople.  The  new  Emperor  Constantino 
Copronymous  was  a  more  tolerant  iconoclast  than  his  father, 
and  his  practical  mind  more  quickly  realised  the  necessary 
limitations  of  imperial  intervention  in  Italian  affairs.  Since 
the  Emperor  could  no  longer  hold  his  own  against  the  Lombards, 
he  was  grateful  for  the  titular  authority  which  the  papal  policy 
had  preserved  for  him,  and  not  too  anxious  to  prevent  the 
Papacy  from  benefiting  by  the  recovery  of  the  imperial 
territories.  All  real  advantage  from  the  recovery  of  the 
Exarchate  fell,  of  course,  to  the  Pope,  but  in  return  for  the 
restoration  of  imperial  prestige  thus  acquired,  the  Emperor 
bestowed  on  Zacharius  the  cities  of  Norma  and  Nympha. 

The  peace  of  Liutprand  outlasted  the  reign  of  his  pious 
successor  Rachis,  but  when  in  749  the  Lombards  wearied  of 
their  saintly  ruler  and  encouraged  him  to  retire  to  a  monastery, 
choosing  in  his  stead  his  warrior  brother  Astolf,  the  unnatural 
Lombard-papal  alliance  temporarily  broke  down.  Zacharius  was 
therefore  glad  of  an  opportunity,  which  occurred  in  752,  of 
renewing  negotiations  with  the  Franks. 

6Q 


THE  APPEAL  TO  THE  FEANKS  61 

Pepin,  the  son  of  Charles  Martel,  saw  that  the  moment  had 
come  at  last  for  which  his  dynasty  had  waited  and  towards 
which  it  had  laboured  for  at  least  two  generations.  Anxious  to 
salve  his  conscience  for  the  perjury  which  he  contemplated, 
Pepin  sent  an  embassy  to  Zacharius  to  inquire  of  him  -'whether 
it  was  well  to  keep  to  kings  who  had  no  royal  power  ".  The  Pope, 
who  understood  the  message  and  knew  what  was  expected  of 
him,  replied  that  "  it  was  better  that  the  man  who  had  the  real 
power  should  also  have  the  title  of  king ".  The  verdict  of 
Zacharius  confirmed  the  overthrow  of  the  "pageant  of  Mero- 
vingian sovereignty '' which  the  anthropomorphic  prejudices  of 
the  Franks,  and  the  cautious  diplomacy  of  the  de  facto  rulers 
had  preserved,  long  after  all  real  power  had  passed  from  the 
dynasty.  The  brilliant  career  of  Charles  Martel  had,  however, 
overcome  the  obstacles  which  deterred  his  house  from  actual 
usurpation,  and  the  papal  sanction  removed  such  lingering 
scruples  as  held  Pepin  back  from  completing  the  work  of  his 
dynasty.  It  was  a  decisive  moment  in  papal  history  when  the 
Popes  thus  began  to  arbitrate  in  national  affairs.  In  the  first 
bestowal  of  the  Pope's  blessing  on  an  act  of  usurpation  in 
answer  to  the  usurper's  appeal,  the  claim  to  give  and  withold 
all  temporal  authority  is  already  foreshadowed. 

Meanwhile,  Astolf  had  taken  Ravenna  and  was  already 
threatening  Rome  in  defiance  of  Liutprand's  treaty.  At  this 
crisis  the  good  Pope  Zacharius  died,  and  was  succeeded  by  the 
Roman  Stephen  II.  (752-757),  whose  short  and  momentous 
pontificate  sealed  the  Prankish  alliance  which  holds  so  high  an 
importance  in  papal  history.  Stephen  did  not  at  once  despair 
of  the  peace-policy,  and  succeeded  in  arresting  the  Lombard 
march,  and  in  renewing  the  twenty  years'  truce  with  Astolf. 
But  both  the  Pope  and  the  King  realised  on  how  slight  a 
foundation  it  rested,  and  under  the  cover  of  amity,  each 
jealously  watched  the  movements  of  the  other.  In  753,  Stephen 
left  Rome  with  the  avowed  intention  of  visiting  Astolf  at  his 
own  court  as  his  predecessor  had  done.  But  the  visit  to  Pavia 
was  merely  a  blind,  or  rather  a  stepping-stone  to  another 
destination,  as  Astolf  realised  when  Stephen  left  him  to  take 
his  way  across  the  Alps.  Early  in  the  year  754,  the  Pope  met 
the  king  of  the  Franks  at  Ponthion.  and  as  they  proceeded  on 
their  way  to  Paris,  King  Pepin  walking  on  foot  beside  the 
Pope's  stirrup,  the  terms  of  the  treaty  of  Kiersy  were 
informally  defined.  Each  had  a  boon  to  ask,  and  each  a 
reward  to  oS"er — King  Pepin,  bearing  himself  in  dutiful  sub- 
mission,  solicited  the  Apostolic  benediction  on  himself  and  his 


62  A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

children  in  their  newly-acquired  dignity :  Pope  Stephen,  pros- 
trating himself  before  the  King  of  the  Franks,  besought  his 
help  against  the  Lombards.  At  St.  Denis,  Stephen  consecrated 
Pepin  and  his  sons  legitimate  rulers  of  France,  receiving  in 
return  the  promise  of  Ravenna  and  the  Pentapolis  as  soon  as 
Pepin  should  be  able  to  wrest  it  from  Astolf.  Pepin  solemnly 
undertook  the  burden  of  the  Lombard  war,  in  return  for  which 
Pope  Stephen,  "with  the  consent  of  the  Roman  people,"  conferred 
on  him  the  title  of  Patricius.  It  was  no  mere  titular  dignity 
which  the  Pope  thus  bestowed  on  his  protector,  but  an  office 
which  comprised  certain  specified  duties  and  defined  the 
relationship  in  which  the  holder  stood  towards  the  city.  It  is 
true  that  the  relationship  was  vague  and  the  responsibilities 
rather  indefinite.  But  the  Patriciate,  since  it  had  been  conferred 
by  custom  on  the  exarch  of  Ravenna,  had  acquired  a  recognised 
official  and  legal  significance,  and  it  is  in  this  sense — allied  to 
the  terms  "  Protector  "  and  "  Defensor  " — that  it  was  conferred 
on  Pepin.  The  Popes  were  careful  not  to  lay  too  much  stress  on 
this  aspect  of  the  title,  and  Pepin  was  cautious  in  his  use  of  it. 
But  the  Patriciate  was  the  stepping-stone  to  higher  things  : 
Pepin  did  well  to  be  cautious,  for  his  non-interference  in  the 
internal  policy  of  the  Papacy  was  the  surest  means  of  hastening 
on  the  climax  towards  which  events  were  already  trending. 

Astolf,  the  Lombard,  had  meanwhile  tried  in  vain  to  prevent 
the  Franco-papal  alliance,  sending  the  royal  monk  Carloman  to 
intervene.  But  nothing  could  daunt  the  untried  religious 
enthusiasm  of  Pepin,  who  swept  down  across  the  Alps  and 
defeated  the  Lombards  at  Susa.  Besieged  by  the  Franks  in 
his  capital  at  Pavia,  Astolf  promised  to  surrender  the  papal 
lands,  and  Pepin,  in  his  first  Deed  of  Gift,  made  them  over  to 
the  Pope,  who  veiled  his  acceptance  behind  the  vague  term 
"  Respublica ".  The  precedent  thus  established  was  quickly 
followed  up.  Hardly  had  Pepin's  forces  retired  behind  the 
Alps,  when  Astolf  advanced  on  Rome,  calling  scornfully  on  the 
Romans  to  "  Let  the  Franks  come  and  deliver  you  out  of  our 
hands ".  The  taunt  was  forwarded  to  the  quarter  where  it 
would  be  most  tellmg,  in  a  letter  from  S.  Peter  to  the  king  of 
the  Franks,  bidding  him  on  pain  of  eternal  punishment  to  come 
and  deliver  the  Apostolic  See  in  its  dire  need.  Another  invasion 
was  the  result,  and  another  Prankish  donation,  which  was 
followed  by  the  death  of  the  Lombard  king — "the  tyrant  and 
associate  of  the  devil,"  wrote  the  Pope,  "  is  pierced  by  the  sword 
of  God  and  flung  down  into  the  Gulf  of  Hell  ".  In  other  words, 
Astolf  the  Warrior  had  met  his  end  in  a  hunting  accident,  and 


THE  APPEAL  TO  THE  FEANKS  63 

Desiderius  reigned  in  his  stead.  Already,  in  the  blasphemous 
abusiveness  of  the  Pope,  and  in  the  clamour  of  faction  fight 
which  surrounded  his  death-bed,  the  consequences  of  the 
institution  of  temporal  power  are  traceable,  and  the  Papacy- 
might  almost  be  said  to  have  changed  its  character  during  the 
three  years  which  intervened  between  the  Treaty  of  Kiersy  and 
the  death  of  Pope  Stephen  H. 

The  election  of  the  new  Pope  was  the  victory  of  the  progres- 
sive party,  who  relied  on  the  Franks,  over  the  reactionary  faction 
who  turned  their  eyes  to  the  Emperor  as  the  more  natural 
protector  of  Rome.  Paul  I.  (757-767)  was  the  brother  of  his 
predecessor,  and  his  superior  in  diplomacy  and  in  the  arts  of 
temporal  government.  He  was  more  amiable  and  easy-going 
than  Stephen,  and  his  dealings  with  men  are  marked  by  less 
bluster  and  more  common-sense.  In  the  face  of  possible  hostility 
from  Byzantium,  Paul  dared  not  provoke  a  quarrel  with  the 
Lombard  king,  whose  side  his  predecessor  had  taken  against  his 
monastic  rival  Rachis.  The  Pope  had,  therefore,  to  fall  back  on 
diplomacy  of  a  rather  doubtful  honesty.  He  invited  Desiderius 
to  Rome  for  the  purpose  of  negotiating  a  renewal  of  the  truce. 
It  was  agreed  that  Desiderius  should  restore  the  four  cities 
which  he  had  siezed  in  revenge  for  papal  assistance  given  to  the 
rebel  duke  of  Spoleto.  In  return  the  Pope  undertook  to  obtain 
from  King  Pepin  the  surrender  of  the  Lombard  hostages  detained 
at  the  Frankish  Court.  The  Lombard  ambassador  went  rejoic- 
ing on  his  way  to  Paris,  bearing  the  Pope's  open  letter  to  the 
Frankish  king,  little  suspecting  that  it  would  be  forestalled  by 
another  document  explaining  that  Paul  had  acted  under  com- 
pulsion, and  entreating  Pepin  to  refuse  the  Lombard  request. 
Thus  the  Lombard  peace  was  preserved  by  papal  artifice,  and 
the  precedent  was  established  by  which  the  spiritual  prerogative 
was  called  upon  to  justify  political  subterfuge. 

But  the  first  protest  against  the  temporal  sovereignty  of  the 
Popes  was  purely  political  in  character,  the  first  of  a  long  series 
of  revolutionary  outbursts  which  dogged  the  Papacy  throughout 
the  Middle  Ages  and  beyond.  The  Roman  nobility  of  the  eighth 
century,  the  forerunners  of  the  Colonna  and  Orsini  of  a  later 
age,  watched  with  jealous  anxiety  the  accumulation  of  papal 
territory  and  by  taking  up  the  cry  of  municipal  privilege  pre- 
pared themselves  for  resistance.  The  gradual  extension  of  the 
Patrimony,  supplemented  by  the  donations  of  the  King  of  the 
Franks,  brought  the  Papacy  into  direct  competition  with  neigh- 
bouring landowners,  and  as  a  natural  consequence  weakened 
the  bond  of  spiritual  allegiance.     In  767,  while  Paul  I.  lay  dying 


64  A  SHOET  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

in  the  Lateran  palace,  Toto  of  Naples,  a  Tuscan  landowner,  came 
to  Rome  and,  with  the  help  of  armed  followers,  forced  the  Romans 
to  accept  his  brother  Constantine  as  Pope.  No  one  was  less 
fitted  than  this  weak  young  man  to  act  the  part  of  anti-pope, 
but  his  brother  compelled  him  to  accept  the  perilous  dignity, 
causing  him  to  be  ordained  in  all  the  necessary  degrees  of  Holy 
Orders  successively,  while  he  himself  discharged  the  safer  and 
more  remunerative  functions  of  the  power  behind  the  throne. 
The  rebellion  of  Toto  failed,  like  almost  all  the  oligarchical 
movements  of  history,  from  the  twofold  cause  of  jealousy  among 
the  units  composing  the  ruling  faction,  and  the  instability  of 
their  supporters  among  the  lower  orders.  The  great  ecclesiastical 
officials,  headed  by  Christophorus,  the  Primicerius,  and  Sergius, 
his  son,  availed  themselves  of  a  sudden  impulse  of  reaction  to 
efi'ect  with  the  help  of  the  Lombards  the  overthrow  of  Con- 
stantine. The  unfortunate  usurper  was  dragged  through  the 
city,  mutilated  and  condemned  by  a  Lateran  synod,  which  in 
consideration  of  his  personal  unimportance  suffered  him  to  end 
his  days  in  inglorious  obscm-ity. 

Apart  from  the  importance  which  attaches  to  the  brief  career 
of  Constantine  as  a  comment  on  the  early  effects  of  temporal 
power,  this  incident  is  interesting  as  revealing  the  growth  during 
this  period  of  the  power  of  the  great  officials.  The  Lateran 
Court  had  inherited  the  heterogeneous  character  of  the  Imperial 
palace,  as  the  fountain  of  all  government.  The  seven  Judices 
de  Clero,  of  whom  the  Primicerios  was  the  foremost,  were  the 
heads  of  the  various  departments.  Though  only  in  minor  orders, 
by  reason  of  their  secular  duties,  they  ranked  next  to  the  Pope 
himself,  over  the  heads  of  the  Cardinals  and  Bishops.  In 
ecclesiastical  processions  they  led  the  Pope  by  the  hand,  sup- 
porting him  on  the  right  and  on  the  left  as  his  immediate 
dependents.  Each  of  the  Judices  had  a  staff  of  notaries  under 
him,  which  formed  the  executive  body.  Only  next  in  importance 
were  the  secular  officers  of  the  household,  the  Vestarius,  the 
Cubicularius,  and  the  Major  Domo,  who  combined  their  personal 
offices  with  wide  judicial  and  administrative  powers.  This 
elaboration  of  the  machinery  of  papal  government,  belonging 
as  it  does  to  the  first  period  of  temporal  power,  suggests  a  com- 
parison with  the  rise  of  territorialism,  as  it  is  to  be  found  in  the 
early  beginnings  of  feudal  monarchy.  What  had  puzzled  Tacitus 
in  his  observation  of  the  German  tribes — the  dignity  attached  to 
personal  service — was  fast  becoming  true  of  the  Romans  them- 
selves. The  offices  of  personal  attendance  on  the  Pope  were 
sought  by  Roman  nobles  with  the  same  avidity  as  the  great 


THE  APPEAL  TO  THE  FKANKS  G5 

palace  offices  were  sought  by  the  Franks.  The  comparison  must 
not,  however,  be  pressed  too  far.  The  palace  organisation  of  the 
Papacy  was  predominantly  an  inheritance  from  tlie  imperial 
past,  borrowed  in  part  from  the  traditions  which  clung  to  the 
city,  and  in  part  directly  copied  from  Byzantium. 

The  overthrow  of  Constantino  was  effected  by  a  combination 
of  the  great  officials  and  the  Lombards,  but  no  sooner  was  it 
accomplished  than  the  allies  drew  apart.  The  Lombard  candi- 
date for  the  papal  succession  was  defeated  by  Stephen  III.,  the 
nominee  of  Christophorus.  Stephen  was  the  one  man  who  had 
remained  loyal  to  Paul  I.  on  his  lonely  death-bed,  but  unhappily 
this  act  of  fidelity  does  not  seem  to  be  characteristic  of  him  as 
Pope.  His  first  object  was  to  effect  the  downfall  of  those  who 
had  raised  him  up  by  conspiring  with  his  former  opponent. 
King  Desiderius.  He  treacherously  delivered  Christophorus 
and  Sergius  over  to  the  Lombards,  after  suborning  their  sup- 
porters among  the  lower  classes  by  pleading  his  own  defence- 
lessness  against  the  vengeance  of  Desiderius. 

In  France,  meanwhile,  King  Pepin  had  been  succeeded  by 
the  mutually  hostile  brothers  Carloman  and  Charles.  Urged 
on  by  the  Pope,  Queen  Bertha  had  managed  to  reconcile  her 
two  sons,  and  in  770  set  out  on  a  journey  to  Rome.  But  her 
visit  was  a  disappointment  to  Stephen,  who  had  hoped  to  renew, 
through  her  mediation,  the  long-standing  Franco-papal  alliance. 
To  the  Pope's  consternation,  rumours  reached  him,  and  were  too 
quickly  confirmed,  of  a  double  marriage  treaty  between  the 
Frankish  brothers  and  the  daughters  of  Desiderius.  Stephen's 
dissuasion  omitted  no  argument,  moral  or  political,  which  the 
situation  might  suggest.  He  praised  the  beauty  of  the  Frankish 
women  to  the  disparagement  of  the  Lombard  race  ;  he  reminded 
the  princes  of  the  fable  which  lay  on  the  Lombards  the  respon- 
sibility for  the  introduction  of  leprosy  into  Italy ;  lastly,  he 
abjured  them,  upon  pain  of  anathema,  to  remain  faithful  to  their 
wives  of  their  own  nation.  But  Charles,  even  in  the  earliest 
stage  of  his  career,  recognised  no  obstacles,  and  deafened  him- 
self to  papal  rebuke.  He  married  the  Lombard  Desiderata,  and 
poured  robust  scorn  on  his  more  tractable  brother.  Stephen's 
panic  was  however  unnecessary,  for  the  Franco-Lombard  alliance 
barely  survived  its  fulfilment.  By  a  characteristic  stroke  of 
apparent  caprice,  which  probably  veiled  a  well-considered 
political  move,  Charles  in  771  repudiated  Desiderata  and  re- 
vived the  papal  alliance.  Secure  in  the  renewal  of  the 
Frankish  alliance,  Pope  Stephen  died,  and  was  succeeded  in  772 
by  Hadrian  I,      The  contrast  between  the  new  Pope  and  his 


66  A  SHOKT  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

predecessor    was  complete.      The    cunning    and    unscrupulous 
Sicilian,  who  broke  faith  with  his  friends  as  freely  as  he  flattered 
his  enemies,  was  succeeded  by  a  high-minded  Roman  of  noble  birth 
and  distinguished  bearing.     Himself  in  sympathy  with  the  great 
official  class,  one  of  Hadrian's  first  acts  was  to  recall  the  party 
of  Christophorus,  thereby  pledging  himself  to  hostility  with  the 
Lombard,  which  the  renewal  of  the  Frankish  alliance  had  already 
prepared.     Associated  with  the  recall  of  the  officials  was  the  fall 
of  their  inveterate  enemy  Afiarta,  the  paid  assassin,  who  acted 
as  Lombard  agent  at  Pavia  and  at  Rome.     Hadrian  pressed  for 
the  fulfilment  of  the  original  Lombard  treaty,   less  with  the 
thought   of  settlement   than   of  bringing   things   to   an   issue. 
Charles  meanwhile  had  embarked  on  hostilities  with  King  Desi- 
derius  on  his  own   account   by   seizing   the   territories  of  his 
nephews  on  the  death  of  his  brother  Carloman.     Carloman's 
widow  appealed  against   Charles   to   the  Lombard   Court,  and 
Desiderius  eagerly  embraced  her  cause  with  the  hope  of  stirring 
up  civil  war  amongst  the  Franks,  and  so  keeping  Charles  out  of 
Italy.     In  774  Desiderius  took  the  offensive  by  seizing  four  papal 
cities,  and  entered  Etruria  on  his  way  to  Rome.     Twenty  monks 
threw  themselves  at  his  feet  in  vain,  and  a  deputation  of  priests 
made   fruitless   intercession   on   behalf  of  the   Apostolic   city. 
Desiderius  was  no  second  Liutprand,  to  turn  back  within  sight 
of  his  goal,  and  Hadrian  fitly  judged  that  the  moment  had  come 
to  put  the  loyalty  of  the  Frankish  hero  to  the  test.     The  con- 
tinual,  and    sometimes    groundless,    complaints   of    Paul    and 
Stephen  III.,  as  well  as  the  plausible  representations  of  Desi- 
derius, had  cooled  the  first  ardour  of  the  Patricians,  and  Charles 
met  the  first  appeal  of  Hadrian  with  non-committal  courtesy. 
Desiderius  protested  that  he  came  to  Rome  as  a  pilgrim,  desir- 
ing nothing  but  an  interview  with  the  Pope.     Hadrian,  with 
some  reason,  suspected  the  pilgrim  who  came  in  the  guise  of 
an  invader,  and  closed  his  gates  against  the  wolf  in  sheep's 
clothing,     Charles,  however,  continued  to  suspect  the  shepherd 
who  had  given  so  many  false  alarms.     Two  preliminary  embas- 
sies failed  to   achieve  a  settlement  before  Charles  set  out  in 
person  across  the  Mont  Cenis.     The  Lombard  resistance  was  no 
more  effective  now  than  in  the  time  of  Pepin.     After  laying  siege 
to   Pavia,   where   Desiderius   himself  had  withdrawn,   Charles 
pressed  on  to  Verona  and  overthrew  the  Lombard  heir-apparent, 
who  held  the  town  in  defence  of  the  exiled  family  of  Carloman. 
Prince  Adelchis  fled  to  Byzantine  protection,  while  the  family 
of  Carloman,  together  with  their  champion,  the  Frankish  rebel 
Autchar,  threw  themselves  on  the  mercy  of  the  conqueror.    Leav- 


THE  APPEAL  TO  THE  FEANKS       67 

ing  his  army  encamped  before  Pavia,  Charles  set  out  for  Rome, 
the  first  of  the  series  of  visits  which  led  to  the  climax  of  the 
year  800.  In  its  political  aspect,  the  visit  of  Charles  to  Hadrian 
merely  ratified  and  confirmed  what  had  taken  place  between 
Pepin  and  Stephen  in  754.  The  treaty  of  Kiersy  was  produced 
by  the  Pope,  and  duly  accepted  by  the  Frankish  king.  The 
days  of  the  Lombard  kingdom  were  numbered,  and  Charles  had 
effected  the  purpose  for  which  the  Patriciate  had  been  bestowed 
on  his  father.  The  enemies  of  St.  Peter  had  been  overthrown 
by  his  self-chosen  protector ;  it  remained  for  St.  Peter's  repre- 
sentative to  secure  the  spoils  of  victory.  Whatever  mental 
reservations  Charles  may  have  made  in  his  acceptance  of  the 
treaty  of  Kiersy,  he  displayed  no  reluctance  to  promise  that  the 
Church  alone  should  be  the  gainer  by  his  Italian  conquests. 
Now,  as  in  754,  the  Exarchate  with  the  whole  of  the  Pentapolis 
was  promised  to  the  Pope,  as  soon  as  the  work  of  conquest  should 
be  completed.  Charles's  amenity  to  the  papal  demands  is  not 
really  inconsistent  with  his  own  territorial  ambition.  His 
schemes  of  Frankish  aggrandisement  hardly  included  Italy  at 
present  in  more  than  the  vague  sense  which  the  term  Patrician 
covered.  Moreover,  his  Saxon  and  Frisian  wars  kept  him  fully 
occupied  nearer  home,  and  it  served  his  ends  better  to  erect 
a  strong  papal  state,  capable  of  maintaining  its  own  against  the 
Lombards,  than  to  expend  his  own  resources  in  an  endeavour  to 
establish  a  Frankish  kingdom  in  Italy  which  in  his  absence  he 
would  be  unable  to  control.  The  same  coui-iderations  had 
moved  his  father  Pepin  to  construct  the  original  treaty,  which 
had  been  signed  in  the  name  of  his  two  sons  as  well  as  his  own. 
But  between  the  original  drafting  of  the  treaty  of  Kiersy  and  its 
ratification  in  774,  new  weight  had  been  thrown  into  the  balance 
from  the  papal  side  by  the  daring  invpntion  of  the  Donation  of 
Constantine.  The  exact  date  when  the  clerical  lawyers  first  stated 
that  Constantine  had  formally  adopted  Pope  Silvester  as  heir  to 
his  temporal  dominion  is  unknown,  but  ever  since  the  emancipa- 
tion of  the  Papacy  from  the  Byzantine  yoke  the  need  for  legalis- 
ing the  basis  of  papal  autocracy  must  have  arisen.  To  a  later 
age,  less  ruled  by  legal  formalism  than  the  eighth  century,  the 
de  facto  sovereignty  of  the  Pope  might  have  justified  its  existence 
de  jure.  Besides,  it  devolved  on  the  Pope  to  provide  for  the 
poor  of  Rome,  and  papal  revenues  were  largely  drawn  from 
Imperial  sources.  But  neither  rationalistic  nor  humanitarian 
arguments  satisfied  the  legal  conscience  of  the  eighth  centiu-y, 
which  demanded  that  all  authority  should  be  founded  on  legal 
right,  and  every  right  should  have  a  warrant.     It  was  in  order 


68  A  SHOET  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

to  meet  this  deficiency,  at  the  moment  when  it  was  likely  to  be 
felt,  and  to  forestall  inquiry  which  might  prove  inconvenient  at 
so  critical  an  epoch,  that  the  clerical  lawyers  supplied  the 
panacea  of  the  Forged  Donation.  A  certain  amount  can  -be  said 
in  justification  of  the  invention,  but  it  remains  undoubtedly  the 
most  deplorable  incident  of  early  papal  history.  It  supplied  a 
fictionary  basis  to  an  institution  worthy  of  a  nobler  foundation, 
and  committed  posterity  to  the  alternative  of  adherence  either 
to  a  fraudulent  delusion  or  to  a  distorted  view  of  history. 

Charles  rode  away  from  Rome  in  the  Easter  week  of  774,  and 
rejoined  his  army  in  the  north.  The  downfall  of  Pavia  was  com- 
pleted. Desiderius  and  his  wife  were  forced  into  monastic  retire- 
ment, and  the  Lombard  dukes  did  homage  to  Charles,  who  placed 
on  his  own  head  the  iron  crown  of  Alboin.  Arichis,  Duke  of  Bene- 
vento,  alone  held  aloof  in  sullen  loyalty  to  Adelchis,  the  son  of 
Desiderius.  No  sooner  had  Charles  withdrawn  across  the  Alps  than 
an  epidemic  of  rebellion  brought  to  light  the  consequences  of  the 
Lombard  downfall.  Ravenna,  always  chafing  against  "  the  yoke 
of  Roman  servitude,"  refused  to  submit  to  papal  domination 
under  the  terms  of  the  treaty  of  Kiersy.  Spoleto,  forgetful  of  past 
benefits,  assumed  independence  and  foreswore  her  former  homage. 
Friuli  prepared  for  revolt  in  the  north,  and  Benevento  in  the 
south  became  the  centre  of  intrigue  for  the  Lombard  pretender, 
and  opened  up  negotiations  with  Byzantium. 

A  punitive  expedition  into  Friuli  was  all  that  it  was  possible 
for  Charles  to  accomplish  at  the  moment,  but  with  characteristic 
good  sense  he  brought  diplomatic  activity  to  bear  on  the  real 
centre  of  disaff"ection  in  overtures  to  the  Empress  Irene.  For 
Charles  still  kept  up  the  fiction  of  Imperial  vassalage,  and  to 
ward  ofi"  a  direct  collision  between  the  Franks  and  the  Empire 
was  as  yet  the  main  anchor  of  his  Italian  policy.  A  marriage 
was  accordingly  proposed,  but  never  carried  into  effect,  between 
Charles's  daughter  and  the  young  Emperor  Constantine  VI. 

These  same  negotiations  led  to  Charles's  third  expedition  to 
Italy  in  780-781,  when  another  interview  with  the  Pope  took 
place,  less  favourable  to  tbe  Holy  See  than  that  of  seven  years 
before.  Charles  insisted  upon  the  coronation  of  his  son  Pepin  as 
King  of  Italy,  and  thus,  to  the  Pope's  distress,  established  a  per- 
manent dynastic  interest  in  Italy. 

Meanwhile  peace  with  the  East  was  by  no  means  easy  to 
maintain.  The  fiction  of  Imperial  vassalage  was  strained  to  its 
uttermost  to  cover  Charles's  conquests  and  donations,  and  the 
exiled  pretender  Adelchis  grew  daily  in  the  favour  of  the  Byzan- 
tine Court.     Arichis,  of  Benevento,  was  in  open  intrigue  with 


THE  APPEAL  TO  THE  FEANKS       69 

Adelchis,  whose  claims  were  the  pretext  of  an  oflfensive  Lombard 
league.  An  important  new  donation  gave  the  nominal  posses- 
sion of  Roman  Tuscany  to  Hadrian,  but  there  were  obstacles  in 
the  way  of  actual  seizure.  Arichis  succumbed  to  Charles's 
demands,  only  to  break  faith  with  him  as  soon  as  he  had 
withdrawn.  He  pledged  himself  to  the  support  of  the  Eastern 
Empire,  and  only  his  death  in  787  freed  Charles  from  the 
imminence  of  war.  To  fill  his  place  Charles  sent  his  son  Grim- 
oald,  who  had  lived  as  a  hostage  at  the  Frankish  court,  and 
returned  to  his  own  people  pledged  to  a  philo-Frankish  policy. 

In  795,  Pope  Hadrian  died,  and  Charles,  on  receiving  the  news 
of  his  death,  wept  as  for  a  brother.  The  two  men  had  been  united 
in  the  closest  bond  of  political  interest  and  mutual  dependence 
for  more  than  twenty  years,  and  Charles  knew  well  how  uncertain 
and  how  momentous  was  the  immediate  future.  The  long  reign  of 
Hadrian  had  not  been  entirely  spent  in  political  aggrandisement, 
although  he  extended  the  papal  boundary  to  the  limit  which  it 
preserved  throughout  the  Middle  Ages  and,  roughly  speaking, 
maintained  until  1870.  Material  prosperity  had  gone  hand  in 
hand  with  political  expansion,  and  Hadrian  was  at  least  as  active 
in  the  one  as  in  the  other  direction.  He  restored  the  walls  and 
the  dams  of  the  Tiber,  and  he  renewed  the  Trajan  aqueducts 
which  carried  water  to  Rome  from  the  Sabatine  country.  Above 
all,  he  was  interested  in  the  colonisation  of  the  Campagna.  He 
extended  the  system  of  forming  Domus  Culture,  or  small  agri- 
cultural settlements,  which  his  forerunner  Zacharias  had  insti- 
tuted. The  revenues  which  these  colonies  produced  were  devoted 
entirely  to  poor  relief,  and  a  hundred  poor  people  were  fed  daily  at 
the  Vatican  on  the  proceeds.  Meanwhile,  the  first  age  of  temporal 
power  was  also  a  period  of  artistic  activity ;  workers  in  mosaic 
and  in  tapestry  were  busy  decorating  St.  Peter's.  But  artistic 
activity  was  accompanied  by  intellectual  apathy.  In  the  dearth 
of  literary  enterprise,  such  names  as  that  of  Adalberga,  the 
cultured  wife  of  Arichis  the  rebel,  or  the  still  greater  historian, 
Paulus  Diaconus,  stand  out  in  remarkable  isolation  in  Italy,  as 
compared  with  the  new  kingdoms  of  the  West. 

Hadrian  was  succeeded  by  Leo  IIL  (796-816),  who  immedi- 
ately sent  a  complimentary  embassy  to  Charles,  informing  him 
of  his  election  and  delivering  into  his  hands  the  banner  of  Rome 
and  the  keys  of  the  Apostle's  grave.  The  new  reign  soon  showed 
signs  that  it  was  to  be  a  troubled  one.  The  power  of  the 
clerical  aristocracy  had  grown  since  the  days  of  Toto  of  Nepi, 
and  under  Hadrian  it  had  developed  into  nepotism.  Hadrian's 
nephews  now  began  to  conspire  against  Leo,  whom  they  regarded 


70  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

as  an  upstart,  and  Paschalis,  the  Primicerius,  headed  a  revolt. 
On  the  25th  of  April,  799,  the  Pope  set  out  from  S,  Laurence,  in 
Lucina,  accompanied  by  an  ecclesiastical  procession  chanting 
the  greater  Litany.  On  the  way  the  Pope  was  attacked  by 
Paschalis  and  Campulus,  both  nephews  of  Pope  Hadrian,  with 
an  armed  force  at  their  backs.  With  outrageous  barbarism  they 
tried  to  mutilate  him,  and  failing,  left  him  a  prisoner  in  the 
monastery  of  S.  Erasmus.  Hence,  through  the  loyalty  of  his 
adherents  and  the  hastiness  of  his  foes,  he  managed  to  escape  to 
St.  Peter's.  The  Frankish  envoy  and  Winichis,  Duke  of  Spoleto, 
helped  him  to  flee  to  his  natural  protector,  Charles.  Charles 
was  in  Saxony,  engaged  in  an  important  campaign,  and  the 
coming  of  the  Pope  at  this  particular  juncture  was  disconcerting. 
However,  he  met  him  at  Paderborn,  listened  to  his  grievances, 
and  sent  him  back  to  Rome  with  two  envoys,  who  were 
instructed  to  take  initial  proceedings  against  the  rebel  officials. 
Moreover,  he  promised  to  follow  them  to  Rome  in  person  in  time 
for  the  Christmas  festival.  With  the  fulfilment  of  this  promise 
is  connected  the  great  central  event  in  mediaeval  history. 
Charles  came  to  Rome  in  800  little  more  than  a  barbarian 
conqueror,  whose  sword  had  freed  Italy  from  the  Lombards,  and 
whose  piety  had  enriched  the  papal  dominions  :  he  left  it  a  few 
days  later  "  Charles  Augustus,  great  and  pacific  Emperor  of  the 
Romans,  crowned  by  God  ".  No  other  single  act  in  the  history  of 
modern  Europe  can  be  compared  in  importance  with  the  simple 
ceremony  in  St.  Peter's,  when  the  Pope  placed  on  the  head  of  the 
kneeling  king  the  crown  of  the  Western  Empire.  Fraught  with 
consequences  for  good  and  for  evil  in  the  future  which  flowed 
from  it,  and  instant  with  problems  of  a  theoretical  and  practical 
natiu'e  which  the  whole  of  mediaeval  history  is  an  attempt  to 
solve,  the  coronation  of  Charles  foreshadows  the  historical 
features  of  the  new  era,  and  gathers  up  all  that  is  permanent  in 
the  Imperial  past.  It  is  impossible  to  conceive  of  European 
history  without  it,  and  the  opportunity  was  unique — it  would 
never  have  occurred  again.  After  324  years  of  disuse,  the  idea 
which  the  western  Imperium  represented  was  still  a  reality  in 
men's  minds,  and  its  barren  titles  were  the  desire  of  the  bar- 
barian nations.  The  revival  of  the  Empire  in  the  person  of 
Charles  was  the  climax  of  the  faith  in  the  survival  of  the 
Imperial  principle,  which  accounts  for  the  "Imperatores  and 
Basileis"  of  Britain,  the  Lombard  "  Flavii,"  and  the  Patricians 
of  Rome  among  the  Gothic  and  Frankish  leaders.  But  it  was 
fast  fading  into  a  memory,  and  the  rise  of  the  Teutonic  king- 
doms had  already  proclaimed  the  triumph  of  separatism  and 


THE  APPEAL  TO  THE  FRANKS  71 

disorder  over  the  principle  of  Imperial  unity.  No  one  less  than 
Charles  could  have  stemmed  the  tide  even  now,  and  no  one  later 
than  he  could  have  attempted  it.  His  success  was  only  partial : 
political  unity  barely  outlasted  him,  and  the  forces  of  disruption 
had  won  their  way  before  the  close  of  the  centviry.  But  his 
achievement,  incomplete  as  it  was,  left  a  deeper  and  more 
permanent  impression  than  many  a  coup  d'etat,  for  it  effected 
issues  graver  than  politics  and  laid  foundations  too  deep  for 
anarchy  or  revolution  to  touch.  To  the  question  as  to  the 
nature  of  the  achievement  of  Charlemagne,  the  whole  of  papal 
history  is  an  answer. 


CHAPTER  IX 
DECAY  OF  THE  CAROLINGIAN  EMPIRE,  ad.  800-867 

THE  revival  of  the  Empire  was  not  without  its  immediate 
effect  on  the  mind  of  Christendom,  biit  the  impression 
was  vague,  and  its  significance  was  barely  understood. 
Something  momentous  had  happened — a  climax  had  been 
reached,  and  a  turning-point  passed  in  the  world's  history.  So 
much  was  dimly  grasped  by  Charlemagne's  contemporaries ;  but 
the  exact  nature  of  the  change — the  consequences  which  it  en- 
tailed, and  the  problems  which  were  to  flow  from  it — these  were 
as  yet  the  secret  of  the  future.  It  was  not  until  later  ages 
brought  to  light  the  great  mediaeval  contest  between  the  Empire 
and  the  Papacy  that  the  coronation  of  Charles  assumed  its  right 
historical  proportions. 

The  years  which  immediately  follow  inaugurate  the  period  of 
definition,  from  which  the  dual  principle  of  Mediaeval  Europe 
gradually  emerges.  Again  and  again,  with  each  fresh  round  of 
the  contest,  the  combatants  turn  back  to  the  original  question 
— What  had  actually  happened  at  the  Coronation  of  the  first 
Mediaeval  Emperor  ?  The  Pope  claimed  that  the  revival  of  the 
Empire  emanated  from  him,  on  the  ground  that  Leo  had  ne- 
gotiated with  Charles,  and  Leo  had  bestowed  the  Crown  which 
Charles  knelt  to  receive.  The  Emperor  as  consistently  urged 
that  Charles  had  won  the  Empire  by  his  military  prowess,  and 
owed  the  legal  confirmation  of  it,  not  to  the  papal  sanction,  but 
to  the  acclamation  of  the  Roman  people.  But  to  talk  of  "  rights  " 
was  in  itself  a  legal  paradox  :  Charles  had  no  "  right,"  other  than 
that  which  his  sword  had  won  for  him,  to  claim  the  Crown,  and 
whatever  legal  power  the  Pope  might  claim  in  the  bestowal  of 
it,  could  at  best  only  have  emanated  from  Constantinople. 
The  truth  was  that  the  Coronation  was  a  splendid  act  of  rebellion, 
which  might  alone  made  possible,  and  expediency  alone  could 
justify. 

According  to  Eginhard,  Leo's  act  on  Christmas  Day,  800,  was 
a  surprise,  and  an  unwelcome  one,  to  Charles,  who  is  said  to 
have  declared  that  he  would  not  have  entered  the  basilica  had 
he  known  of  the  Pope's  intention.     It  is  a  little  difficult  to  har- 

72 


DECAY  OF  THE  CAROLINGIAN  EMPIEE         73 

monise  this  statement  with  the  obvious  trend  of  Charles's  policy 
in  the  period  which  leads  up  to  it.  Moreover,  Alcuin  had 
written  to  Charles  in  799,  advising  him  to  go  at  once  to  the 
succour  of  Italy,  because  "  that  which  we  woitld  possess  must 
be  upheld,  in  order  that  we  lose  not  the  greater  to  acquire  the 
less  ".  The  Christmas  gift,  which  followed  shortly  after  the 
letter,  was  addressed,  "  Ad  splendorem  Imperialis  potentiae," 
showing  clearly  that  Charles's  acceptance  of  the  Imperial  Crown 
was  not  only  premeditated,  but  had  also  been  discussed  with 
his  chief  counsellor  some  time  before.  But,  on  the  other  hand, 
Charles  was  still  negotiating  with  Byzantium  about  a  maiTiage 
project  with  the  Empress  Irene,  and  it  is  quite  possible  that  the 
exact  moment  which  the  Pope  chose  for  the  ceremony  was, 
therefore,  not  a  convenient  one  for  Charles,  who  would  probably 
be  anxious  to  cement  the  friendship  between  himself  and  the 
Empress  in  every  possible  way  before  embarking  on  an  act  of 
rebellion.  Moreover,  support  is  given  to  Eginhard's  statement 
by  the  character  of  the  ceremony  itself,  which  in  its  impressive 
simplicity  suggests  that  the  Coronation  Act  was  more  or  less 
spontaneous.  Lastly,  hypocrisy  was  entirely  foreign  to  the 
character  of  Charles,  which,  though  by  no  means  perfect,  was 
incapable  of  duplicity,  or  of  feigning  a  regret  that  he  did  not 
feel.  Probably  the  truth  was  that  the  Coronation  was  a  surprise 
as  to  the  moment  of  its  consummation,  but  not  as  to  the  idea, 
which  had  already  been  in  the  air  for  a  long  time.  As  long  as 
four  years  before  the  actual  date,  a  mosaic  in  the  triclinium  of 
the  Lateran  represented  on  the  one  side,  Christ  giving  the  keys 
of  the  Apostles'  grave  to  Pope  Silvester,  and  the  banner  of  Rome 
to  Constantine,  while,  on  the  other  side,  St.  Peter  bestowed  the 
pallium  on  Leo  III.,  and  a  standard  on  Charlemagne. 

Historians  of  the  time  like  to  talk  of  the  "  translation  "  of  the 
Empire,  in  order  to  emphasise  the  idea  of  continuity.  The  ex- 
pression covers,  however,  only  a  surface  truth.  The  mediaeval 
Emperor  was  only  in  appearance  the  successor  of  Justinian,  for 
the  life  within  the  Empire  was  new.  It  was  Teutonic,  and  soon 
to  be  feudal.  Its  universality  was  a  fiction,  supported  by  popu- 
lar allegiance  alone  :  the  real  spiritual  unity  had  already  passed 
to  the  Church,  which  had  gathered  to  itself  all  that  was  undying 
in  the  spirit  of  the  Ancient  Empire.  Charles  seems  to  have 
understood  this  from  the  first,  for  he  at  once  renounced  the  idea 
of  making  Rome  his  capital,  and  contented  himself  with  enforcing 
his  suzerainty  in  principle.  He  imposed  no  new  taxes  or  mili- 
tary burdens  on  the  city,  and  he  respected  the  limitations  which 
the  non-interference  policy  of  recent  Emperors  had  imposed  on 


74  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

Imperial  sovereignty  in  Rome.  Legally,  however,  he  insisted  on 
the  acknowledgment  of  his  supremacy,  and  from  the  first  his 
Missi  held  their  courts  in  the  city,  and  his  envoys  heard  the 
appeals  of  his  subjects. 

After  Easter,  801,  Charles  left  the  affairs  of  Italy  chiefly  to 
his  sons.  Leo,  although  he  was  decidedly  unpopular,  was  cap- 
able of  maintaining  cood  order,  remaining,  on  the  whole,  loyal 
to  the  Empire,  which  he  regarded  as  his  creation.  In  814, 
Charles  died,  and  his  son.  Lewis,  whom  he  had  already  associated 
with  him  in  the  Empire,  succeeded  him  as  sole  Emperor.  It 
was  the  substitution  of  weakness  for  strength,  and  the  effects  were 
immediately  felt  by  Leo,  in  two  rebellions  of  the  nobles,  in  814 
and  815.  It  was  the  person  and  the  policy  of  Leo  that  the  ris- 
ings were  directed  against,  not  apparently  the  growth  of  temporal 
power  nor  the  establishment  of  the  new  political  order. 

Leo's  successor,  Stephen  IV.  (816-817),  adopts  a  more  depend- 
ent tone  towards  the  Emperor  than  his  predecessor,  but  a  Pope 
could  afford  to  be  pliant  in  his  dealings  with  Lewis  the  Pious. 
The  Emperor,  who  had  in  obedience  to  his  father,  seized  the 
Imperial  Crown,  and  placed  it  on  his  own  head  at  Aachen,  now 
submitted  to  receive  it  again  from  the  hands  of  the  Pope  at 
Rheims,  thus  conceding  the  principle  that  papal  coronation  was 
an  indispensable. condition  of  Imperial  sovereignty.  In  return 
for  this  act  of  grace,  gifts  and  privileges  were  showered  on 
Stephen  by  Lewis,  whose  piety  could  find  no  adequate  expres- 
sion except  in  self-abasement  before  his  spiritual  compeer. 

Paschalis  I.  (817-824)  ushers  in  the  first  period  of  papal 
triumph.  His  ordination  (for  he  was  a  monk)  was  hurried  so  as 
to  prevent  Imperial  intervention, — henceforth  the  first  object  of 
a  Bishop-designate.  His  reign  saw  the  opening  of  the  dynastic 
struggle  which  led  to  the  premature  downfall  of  the  Carolingian 
dynasty.  A  revolt  against  Lewis  was  headed  by  Charles's  grand- 
son, Bernard,  deputy-king  of  Italy,  who  had  succeeded  his 
father,  Pipin,  in  810.  Although  he  was  supported  by  all  the 
elements  of  disorder  of  which  Italy  could  boast — always  a  con- 
siderable contingent — Bernard  was  obliged  to  throw  himself  at 
his  uncle's  feet  before  he  had  had  time  to  organise  his  forces. 
With  cowardly  barbarity,  Lewis  allowed  the  youth  to  be  blinded, 
in  such  a  way  that  he  died  of  the  effects.  The  Emperor,  in  con- 
sequence, submitted  to  the  performance  of  public  penance, 
thus  for  the  first  time  exposing  the  Imperial  dignity  to  public 
humiliation. 

Soon  after,  a  more  direct  triumph  fell  to  the  Papacy  by  a 
successful  resistance  of  Imperial  jurisdiction.      Paschalis  had 


DECAY  OF  THE  CAROLINGIAN  EMPIRE         75 

ordered  the  execution  of  two  rebel  Imperial  officials,  and  called 
down  the  disapproval  of  Lewis  on  his  precipitancy.  In  spite  of 
Lewis's  attempts  to  take  judicial  proceedings,  the  Pope  refused  to 
submit  to  an  Imperial  trial,  and  managed  to  clear  liimself  instead 
by  an  Oath  of  Purgation  after  the  manner  of  his  predecessors. 

The  reign  of  Eugenius  II.  (824-827)  is  chiefly  memorable  for 
the  imposition  of  the  Constitution  of  Lothar.  The  co-Emperor 
— a  considerably  more  effective  person  than  his  father — was  sent 
to  Rome  to  negotiate  in  the  Imperial  interests  with  the  new 
Pope.  The  last  reign  had  revealed  a  distinct  fall  in  the  Imperial 
prestige :  Rome  had  shown  a  corresponding  disposition  to  treat 
her  Emperor  too  cheaply.  The  Constitution  of  Lothar  was 
directed  against  this  growing  spirit  of  independence,  and  particu- 
larly against  the  Pope,  whose  rights,  however,  are  carefully 
respected.     The  five  main  points  with  which  it  deals  are : — 

1.  The  Imperial  Protection,  which  is  carefully  defined  on  the 
principle  of  the  joint  authority  of  the  Pope  and  the  Emperor. 
The  Pope  is  to  have  immediate  and  initiatory  powers,  and  the 
Emperor  appellate  jurisdiction. 

2.  Personal  rights  are  carefully  guarded.  Roman  and  Salic 
law  are  to  exist  side  by  side,  the  choice  between  them  resting 
with  the  individual. 

3.  Oath  of  fealty  to  the  Emperor  is  to  be  imposed  on  all 
officials. 

4.  Territorial  authority  of  the  Pope  is  carefully  laid  down 
according  to  statute. 

5.  Papal  elections  are  to  be  ratified  by  the  Emperor,  and  the 
oath  taken  by  the  Pope  in  the  presence  of  the  Missus  "  after  the 
manner  of  the  election  of  Eugenius  ". 

The  attempt  of  Lothar  to  establish  a  modus  vivendi  between 
Emperor  and  Pope  has,  however,  a  documental  rather  than  an 
historical  importance,  for  it  was  soon  swept  away  in  the  vortex 
which  destroyed  the  fortunes  of  the  Carolingian  dynasty.  In 
829,  the  House  of  Lewis  the  Pious  began  to  divide  against  itself. 
A  fourteen  years'  strviggle  of  the  sons  against  their  father,  and 
brother  against  brother  led  to  the  triumph  of  separatism  on  the 
field  of  Auxerre,  and  the  final  overthrow  of  European  unity  in  the 
partition  treaty  of  Verdun,  843. 

Unfortunately,  the  traditional  connection  between  the  Papacy 
and  the  House  of  Charlemagne  was  too  strong  to  allow  Pope 
Gregory  IV.  (827-844)  to  stand  aloof  from  the  household  disputes 
which  were  rapidly  overwhelming  it.  The  Pope  was  moreover 
neither  strong  enough  to  arbitrate  nor  wise  enough  to  improve 
matters  by  his  intervention.     In  830,  he  tried  to  interfere  in 


76  A  SHOET  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

person  on  behalf  of  the  Emperor,  when  Lewis  was  a  captive  in 
the  hands  of  his  sons,  but  the  attempt  was  a  failure,  and  he 
returned  to  Rome  "  without  honour  ".  Subsequently,  when  con- 
science prompted  him  to  reprimand  Lothar  for  his  undutiful 
conduct,  Gregory  had  to  submit  to  the  pillage  of  his  property, 
and  the  execution  of  his  oflQcials.  By  the  partition  of  Verdun, 
in  which  the  Pope  had  no  voice,  Italy  became  incorporated  into 
the  Middle  Kingdom  which  with  the  Imperial  title  passed  into 
the  hands  of  Lothar  and  became  known  as  Lotharingia. 

Meanwhile,  the  pontificate  of  Gregory  IV.  saw  the  beginning 
of  the  Saracen  invasion  of  Italy.  By  830,  the  pirate-fanatics  had 
practically  made  themselves  masters  of  Sicily.  In  840  they 
gained  their  first  foothold  on  Italian  soil  by  means  of  a  disputed 
election  in  Benevento,  both  sides  appealing  in  turn,  with  an 
incredible  lack  of  patriotism,  to  the  terrible  invader.  Once  more 
Italy  was  about  to  become  the  prey  of  a  foreign  invader,  and 
once  more  the  Bishops  of  Rome  come  forward  as  her  deliverers. 
In  the  foundation  of  the  new  fortification  of  Gregoriopolis  at  Ostia, 
Gregory  inaugurated  that  policy  of  systematic  defence  which 
his  successors  carried  on  with  so  much  energy  and  persistence. 

Gregory  was  not  a  moment  too  soon.  In  the  three  years' 
reign  of  his  successor  Sergius  II.  (844-847),  the  Saracens  advanced 
as  far  as  Rome  itself,  and  sacked  St.  Peter's,  spoiling  the  sacred 
shrine  of  the  Apostles,  and  pillaging  the  "  treasure-house  of  three 
centuries  of  art".  The  valour  of  Guido  of  Spoleto  eventually 
relieved  the  beleaguered  city,  but  not  before  the  shock  was  felt  to 
the  farthest  limits  of  Christendom.  A  tax  was  imposed  by 
Lothar  throughout  the  Imperial  dominions  for  the  fortification  of 
St.  Peter's,  and  Europe  suffered  its  first  distraint  for  the  salvation 
of  its  shrines  from  Mohammedan  desecration. 

The  relations  of  Sergius  with  the  Emperor  had  not  always 
been  so  harmonious,  but  the  advantage  remained  with  the 
Papacy.  At  the  time  of  the  accession  of  Sergius,  Lothar  sent 
his  son  Lewis  to  dispute  the  validity  of  papal  election  without 
the  Imperial  consent,  in  accordance  with  the  terms  of  the  new 
Constitution.  Sergius  received  the  Imperial  prince  with  even 
more  than  the  customary  honours,  but  when  Lewis  reached 
St.  Peter's,  he  found  the  doors  of  the  Basilica  locked  and  barred 
against  him.  The  Pope  refused  to  admit  him  until  he  had 
gauged  the  spirit  in  which  he  came.  Not  until  he  had  pledged 
himself  to  peace  was  Lewis  allowed  to  present  his  gift  according 
to  the  custom  of  his  fathers.  Finally,  together  with  his  Franks, 
he  acknowledged  Sergius,  and  received  at  his  hands  the 
Imperial  Crown. 


DECAY  OF  THE  CAKOLINGIAN  EMPIRE         77 

The  short  reign  of  Sergius  had  not  passed  without  dissension 
among  the  Romans,  and  his  death  was  followed  by  a  sack  of  the 
Vatican,  which  was  carried  out  more  ruthlessly  than  usual. 
The  people  saw  in  the  Saracen  invasion  an  act  of  divine 
retribution  for  the  simoniacal  practices  of  the  Pope,  who  with 
his  brother  is  said  to  have  established  a  tyranny  in  Rome.  The 
strong  and  weak  points  of  temporal  power  as  a  political  system 
were  never  brought  into  stronger  relief  than  in  the  time  of  the 
Saracen  invasions.  The  same  Popes  who  exercise  oppression 
over  their  subjects  and  mingle  ingloriously  in  the  household 
politics  of  the  decadent  Carolingians,  are  found  active  in 
organising  resistance  to  the  foreign  invader,  and  unsparing  in 
their  self-sacrifice  for  the  defence  of  their  holy  places  against 
the  infidel. 

The  climax  in  the  early  struggle  with  the  Saracens  was 
reached  in  the  reign  of  the  able  Leo  IV.  (847-855).  With  a 
sagacity  born  of  despair,  the  southern  seaports  had  formed 
themselves  into  a  league  for  neutral  defence  under  the  auspices 
of  the  Pope.  Leo  IV.  blessed  their  enterprise  and  sent  them 
forth,  fortified  by  the  Mass  and  inspired  by  his  own  enthusiasm, 
to  meet  the  Saracen  fleet  off  Ostia.  The  heroism  of  the 
Neapolitan  navy  in  rowing  out  to  meet  the  invader  brought  on 
an  immediate  action,  and  the  help  of  a  storm  gave  a  decisive 
victory  to  the  defendants.  The  remnants  of  the  Moorish  army 
who  reached  the  Italian  shores  were  taken  prisoners  by  the 
Roman  troops,  under  the  leadership  of  Leo  himself,  who  conveyed 
them  back  to  Rome  to  swell  the  labour  market  for  his  new 
enterprise.  This  was  the  building  of  the  Leonine  city,  which 
stands  as  a  monument  to  the  sang-froid  and  energy  of  the  Pope, 
who  could  conceive  and  effect  a  project  for  adorning  Rome  with 
new  splendours  at  the  very  moment  when  the  Saracens  were 
overrunning  the  Campagna  and  entering  into  a  death-struggle 
with  the  papal  fleet.  The  magnificence  of  the  consecration  of 
the  new  city  in  the  year  852  kindles  the  enthusiasm  of  the  most 
pessimistic  chroniclers,  and  no  shadow  from  the  impending 
storm-clouds  darkens  their  accounts  of  the  Imperial  pageant 
which  completed  the  handiwork  of  Leo  IV.  This  rapid  tran- 
sition from  gloomy  foreboding  to  almost  irresponsible  rejoicing 
is  characteristic  of  the  Middle  Ages :  pageant  and  calamity 
were  never  inconsistent ;  a  litany  was  as  festal  in  its  outward 
pomp  as  a  triumphal  procession,  and  the  darkest  hour  of 
mediaeval  history  is  painted  in  the  most  glowing  colours  and  the 
richest  symbolism. 

Thus,  never  before  in  the  history  of  the  city  were  more  royal 


78     A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

pilgrims  attracted  to  Rome  than  now  in  her  days  of  adversity. 
Among  them  came  Ethelwulf  of  Wessex,  hereafter  to  become  a 
monk,  with  the  boy  Alfred,  to  whom  the  Pope  showed  more  than 
his  usual  graciousness,  anointing  him  as  heir  to  his  father's  Crown, 
in  spite  of  the  existence  of  his  three  elder  brothers.  Daily  a 
fresh  contingent  flocked  to  Rome  along  the  pilgrim's  way,  among 
them  most  of  the  saints  and  a  considerable  proportion  of  the 
criminals  of  Europe.  The  strange  penal  code  of  the  time — at 
times  the  gentlest,  and  at  times  the  most  inhuman  ever  known — 
prescribed  a  journey  to  Rome  as  the  recognised  expiation  of  the 
most  heinous  crimes  which  society  recognised.  Bands  of 
murderers  and  highway  robbers,  with  chained  hands  and 
sandalled  feet,  would  call  at  a  wayside  monastery  and  demand 
as  a  right  free  entertainment  at  the  hands  of  their  religious 
hosts.  Occasionally  their  right-of-way  was  abused,  and  Leo  on 
one  occasion  complains  to  the  Emperor  that  the  Imperial  Missi 
had  molested  the  pilgrim-sinners,  who  were  under  the  Pope's 
special  protection. 

But  the  complaint  was  not  very  serious,  and  it  is  almost  the 
only  sign  we  have  of  ill-feeling  between  Lewis  and  Leo,  who  seem 
to  have  contrived  to  keep  on  unusually  good  terms  with  each 
other.  The  Emperor  had  made  up  his  mind,  however,  that  Leo's 
successor  should  be,  if  not  an  Imperial  nominee,  at  least  one  who 
knew  how  to  serve  the  Emperor's  interests  in  Rome.  Such  a  man 
was  Arsenius,  Bishop  of  Portus,  but  in  his  own  person  he  was  dis- 
qualified for  the  Papacy  by  the  episcopal  ofiice  which  he  already 
held.  His  son  Anastasius  was  therefore  carefully  trained  up  for 
this  purpose.  But  he  lacked  the  wisdom  to  bide  his  time  until 
everything  was  prepared,  and  in  the  reign  of  Leo  IV.  he  went 
into  opposition.  On  the  election  of  Leo's  successor,  Benedict  III. 
(855-858),  Anastasius  attempted  to  seize  the  Papacy  by  force. 
He  won  over  the  Imperial  envoys,  and  with  their  co-operation 
took  possession  of  the  Lateran,  making  the  newly-elected  Pope  his 
prisoner.  The  loyalty  of  the  Romans,  however,  saved  Rome  from 
this  act  of  tyranny,  and  the  fortunes  of  Anastasius  were  finally 
overthrown.  He  ended  his  days  as  Abbot  of  St.  Maria  Trastavere, 
from  which  honourable  sinecure  he  henceforth  proved  innocuous 
to  papal  policy. 

The  strangest  of  all  the  legends  which  afterwards  came  to  be 
attached  to  the  Papacy  in  the  age  of  its  decadence  took  its  date 
from  the  pontificate  of  Benedict  III.  The  legend  of  Pope  Joan 
has  no  place  in  history  other  than  that  which  it  can  claim  as 
pointing  to  the  low  moral  standard  which  posterity  was  ready  to 
ascribe  to  the  first  ages  of  papal  monarchy.     The  belief  that  the 


DECAY  OF  THE  CAKOLINGTAN  EMPIRE         79 

patriot  Pope  Leo  IV.  was  succeeded  by  a  woman  of  infamous 
character,  resting  as  it  does  on  absolutely  no  foundation,  is  only 
worthy  of  notice  because  of  the  credulity  of  fanatical  opponents 
of  the  papal  principle  in  later  ages. 

The  successor  of 'Benedict  III.  was  one  of  the  men  of  genius 
who  make  the  epochs  of  papal  history.  Nicholas  I.  (858-867)  owed 
his  successes  in  some  measure  no  doubt  to  the  fact  that  he  owed 
his  election  to  the  influence  of  the  Emperor  Lewis,  who  was 
present  at  the  time.  He  thus  embarked  free  from  the  embarass- 
ments  of  Imperial  opposition ;  but  he  soon  showed  an  unusual 
capacity  to  use  the  good  fortune  with  which  he  was  endowed. 
Everything  seemed  to  conspire  to  break  the  new  harmony  be- 
tween the  Papacy  and  the  Empire  thus  established,  but  when- 
ever discord  threatened,  Nicholas  held  fast  to  the  dominant. 

From  the  familiar  quarter  of  Ravenna,  the  first  troubles 
came.  John,  the  Archbishop,  had  oppressed  the  papal  subjects 
in  Emilia  and  appealed  against  the  wrath  of  the  Pope  to  the 
Emperor.  Lewis  sent  him  back  to  Rome  with  Imperial  Missi  to 
support  him  in  his  defence.  Nicholas,  however,  took  his  stand 
on  the  spiritual  prerogative,  which  gave  him  an  assured  victory. 
John  was  proclaimed  heterodox,  and  the  Missi  contumacious 
for  associating  themselves  with  him.  The  Decree  of  769,  for- 
bidding foreign  interference  in  papal  elections,  was  revived  by 
the  way  to  remind  Lewis  of  his  obligations.  The  affair  ended 
in  a  visit  of  Nicholas  to  Ravenna,  where  he  calmed  the  agitated 
populace  and  received  the  submission  of  the  Archbishop. 

Meanwhile,  a  more  serious  entanglement  was  brought  about 
by  a  domestic  tragedy  in  the  household  of  the  Emperor's  brother. 
Lothar  of  Lotharingia  had  divorced  his  innocent  wife.  Thiutberga, 
for  the  sake  of  his  mistress,  and  obtained  by  bribery  the  sanction 
of  his  act  by  the  Synod  of  Metz.  Nicholas,  zealous  for  the  purity 
of  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction,  and  indignant  at  the  connivance 
of  the  Frankish  Bishops  with  the  king's  immoral  practices, 
fulminated  against  the  Synod,  reversed  its  decrees,  and  excom- 
municated its  members.  Following  the  example  of  John  of 
Ravenna,  the  Bishops  appealed  to  the  Emperor,  representing  to 
Lewis  that  the  Imperial  dignity  was  compromised  in  the  Pope's 
action  against  his  brother.  Lewis  accordingly  descended  on 
Rome,  urged  on  by  the  Bishops,  to  punish  the  Pope.  The  dignity 
and  wisdom  of  Nicholas  saved  the  situation.  He  withdrew  to 
St.  Peter's  by  night,  and  remained  there  two  days  in  prayer, 
vouchsafing  no  reply  to  the  Emperor's  vituperations,  and  main- 
taining an  awe-inspiring  calmness  in  the  face  of  his  defiance. 
An  interview  with  Lewis  in  the  Lateran  followed,  in  which  the 


80  A  SHOET  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

Emperor  failed  to  bend  the  Pope  to  his  will.  The  Bishops 
damaged  their  own  cause  by  their  demeanour ;  they  laid  on  the 
shrine  of  St.  Peter  a  document  expressed  in  terms  of  extravagant 
defiance  which  failed  to  draw  any  reply.  They  shocked  public 
opinion  by  suffering  their  followers  to  attack  an  ecclesiastical 
procession  and  break  the  Cross  of  St.  Helena,  which  was  believed 
to  contain  portions  of  the  True  Cross.  Lewis  withdrew  to 
Ravenna,  but  not  before  he  had  formally  reconciled  himself  with 
the  outraged  Pope,  who  had  not  launched  his  spiritual  weapons 
in  vain.  Lothar  of  Lotharingia  was  persuaded,  for  a  time  at 
least,  to  conform  to  the  moral  law  as  interpreted  by  the  Pope, 
and  his  unfortunate  wife  was  compelled  to  continue  her  life  of 
torture  at  his  side. 

Unlike  most  of  the  Popes  of  this  period,  Nicholas  did  not 
allow  the  papal-imperial  struggle  to  absorb  his  whole  energies. 
An  interesting  illustration  of  his  constructive  statesmanship  is 
supplied  by  the  so-called  Bulgarian  constitution.  The  Slav 
king,  Boris  of  Bulgaria,  pathetically  harassed  by  the  conflicting 
doctrines  of  the  Eastern  and  Western  missionaries,  referred 
his  difficulties  to  the  Pope  as  the  fountain  of  doctrinal  interpre- 
tation. In  866,  Boris  sent  his  son  to  Rome  bearing  gifts  which 
were  magnificent  enough  to  excite  the  jealousy  of  Lewis,  who 
coveted  Bulgaria  for  the  Empire.  Nicholas,  however,  tactfully 
smoothed  over  the  situation,  and  sent  his  famous  "  Responsa  " 
to  the  Bulgarian  king.  From  the  answers  of  the  Pope  to  the 
questions  referred  to  him  by  Boris  can  be  gathered  an  almost 
complete  code  for  a  barbaric  nation,  and  in  this  respect  the  work 
of  Nicholas  has  been  compared  to  the  Jesuit  Constitution  of 
Paraguay.  The  Bulgarian  king  is  exhorted  on  the  subjects  of 
daily  life,  social  conduct,  customs  of  war,  and — predominantly  of 
course — his  relationship  to  the  Clergy.  Among  other  things, 
Boris  is  instructed  how  to  dress,  what  to  eat,  how  to  prepare  for 
battle,  and  how  to  treat  the  vanquished.  In  conduct  he  is  to  be 
merciful,  and  humble  in  his  bearing,  for  the  ideals  set  before 
him  are  those  of  the  new  world — of  feudalism,  as  it  was  already 
known  to  Europe,  and  of  chivalry,  which  owed  its  origin 
essentially  to  the  mediaeval  Church. 

But  the  pontificate  of  Nicholas,  looked  at  as  a  whole,  is 
greater  than  any  of  his  single  achievements.  The  fact  that  he 
was  the  first  Pope  to  be  crowned  with  the  papal  tiara  is 
significant,  for  in  him  papal  monarchy  finds  its  first  conscious 
expression.  Other  Popes  had  exercised  a  prerogative  as  wide — 
a  few  of  his  predecessors  had  seen  with  the  eyes  of  vision  the 
ideal  which  Nicholas  realised.      But  no  one  before   him   had 


DECAY  OF  THE  CAKOLINGIAN  EMPIKE         81 

taken  papal  supremacy  so  completely  for  granted,  or  forced  the 
world  to  recognise  and  acknowledge  it  as  the  pivot  of  the 
European  political  system.  His  personal  attributes  were  largely 
but  not  entirely  responsible.  The  decay  of  the  Carolingian 
Empire  left  Europe  without  a  political  leader,  and  the  Papacy 
was  undoubtedly  the  most  natural  power  to  fill  the  breach. 
The  deferential  attitude  of  particular  Carolingian  princes — 
above  all,  of  Lewis  the  Pious — had  contributed  to  the  growth 
of  the  idea  of  spiritual  dominion  which  the  consolidation  of 
the  national  divisions  of  Europe  had  tended  to  define.  Lastly, 
the  famous  Isidorian  decretals,  which  were  compiled  at  this  time 
by  an  unscrupulous  French  monk,  collected  all  the  fictionary 
papal  documents,  beginning  with  the  Donation  of  Constantino, 
into  a  producible  warrant.  Nicholas  was  the  first  Pope  to  make 
use  of  this  fraudulent  charter  of  prerogative,  which  gained 
universal  acceptance  in  the  credulous  age  which  is  responsible 
for  it,  and  was  probably  implicitly  believed  in  by  the  Popes 
themselves. 

In  his  personal  merits,  his  intrepidity,  and  his  persistence,  as 
well  as  his  rarer  gifts  of  political  originality,  Nicholas  I.  is 
worthy  to  be  called  the  forerunner  of  Gregory  VII. 


CHAPTER  X 

ARISTOCRATIC  TYRANNY  AND  SUBJECT  POPES, 
A.D.  867-954 

NICHOLAS  was  not  an  easy  Pope  to  succeed.  His 
individuality  had  stamped  itself  on  the  politics  of  his 
age,  and  he  left  behind  him  strong  enemies  and 
ardent  admirers,  who  combined  in  hostility  to  his  successor, 
Adrian  II.  (867-872).  Adrian  was  a  well-intentioned  man  of 
compromise,  without  much  initiative  or  strength  of  purpose. 
He  was  accused  by  the  partisans  of  his  predecessor  of  annulling 
the  decrees  of  Nicholas,  and  in  his  anxiety  to  clear  himself  from 
this  charge  he  incurred  the  epithet  of  "Nicholaite"  from  the 
other  party. 

He  persisted  in  maintaining  the  impossible  domestic  relations 
of  Lothar  and  Thiutberga,  and  terrorised  the  cowardly  sinner 
into  perjury,  by  making  him  swear  that  he  had  abjured  the 
illicit  society  of  his  lover  ever  since  the  arbitration  of  Nicholas. 

In  871,  the  Emperor  Lewis  took  the  Sultan  prisoner  at  Bari, 
and  thereby  kindled  the  jealousy  of  Basil  and  the  Emperor  of 
the  East.  In  order  to  smooth  over  the  situation,  Lewis  wrote  a 
letter  to  Basil,  which  is  interesting  for  the  light  which  it  throws 
on  the  theory  of  Imperial  election,  as  it  was  interpreted  at  this 
time.  Lewis  ascribes  his  right  to  the  title  of  the  Imperium  to 
the  sanction  of  the  Roman  people,  as  expressed  by  the  acclama- 
tion at  the  Coronation  of  Charles — "  From  the  Romans  received 
we  this  name  and  this  dignity".  Even  without  the  confirmation 
of  the  Pope  the  claim  would  hold  good,  and  he  illustrates  this 
by  reference  to  previous  Emperors  crowned  without  papal 
consent,  but  he  recognises  at  the  same  time  that  "  the  divine 
operation  through  papal  consecration "  gives  added  validity  to 
a  title  already  established. 

They  were  brave  words  coming  as  they  did  from  the  last  of 
the  Carlings  who  was  worthy  of  the  tradition  of  his  House,  on 
the  eve  of  its  final  humiliation.  In  the  same  year  as  his  letter 
to  Basil,  Lewis  was  taken  prisoner  by  Adelchis  of  Benevento,  who 
was  said  to  be  in  league  with  the  Sultan.      In  spite  of   the 

82 


AEISTOCKATIC  TYRANNY  AND  SUBJECT  POPES     83 

consolation  which  Adrian  hastened  to  administer  by  a  repetition 
of  the  Coronation  ceremony  in  Rome,  Lewis  never  recovered 
from  the  blow  thus  dealt  at  his  Imperial  honour.  He  died  soon 
after  in  the  middle  of  his  Saracen  campaign,  but  not  before  he 
had  brought  the  treacherous  Duke  of  Benevento  to  his  feet  and 
forced  him  to  sue  for  pardon  through  the  intercession  of  the  new 
Pope,  John  VIII.  (872-882). 

In  the  reign  of  John  VIII.,  the  doom  of  the  Papacy  became 
apparent.  It  had  been  too  long  and  too  closely  associated  with 
the  tangled  politics  of  the  Carling  House  not  to  share  in  its 
decay.  Of  the  two  branches  which  contended  for  the  Imperial 
crown  in  875,  the  Pope  naturally  turned  to  the  Prankish  line,  and 
threw  his  support  unreservedly  on  to  the  side  of  Charles  the 
Bald.  The  connection  of  the  Popes  had  always  been  closer  with 
the  Franks  than  with  the  Germans,  owing  partly  to  circumstance, 
partly  to  geographical  conditions,  and  partly  to  the  undefinable 
kinship  of  national  character  which  exists  between  the  Italians 
and  the  Franks  of  every  age. 

The  opposition  party,  headed  by  Formosus,  Bishop  of  Portus, 
favoured  Charles  the  Fat  of  Germany,  but  the  weight  of  papal 
influence,  which  the  long  purse  of  the  Franks  secured,  held  the 
balance  at  first  in  favour  of  Charles  the  Bald.  From  875  to 
877,  the  Prankish  line  maintained  its  ascendancy,  but  on  the 
death  of  Charles  the  Bald,  the  Imperial  Crown  was  once  more 
open  to  competition.  Lambert  of  Spoleto  descended  on  Rome, 
and  took  the  Pope  prisoner  in  the  name  of  Charles  the  Fat.  John, 
however,  escaped  to  France,  and  espoused  the  cause  of  Lewis 
the  Stammerer.  But  the  Pope  soon  saw  that  his  loyalty  to  the 
Prankish  line  would  avail  him  nothing :  Lewis  was  a  "  roi 
faineant,"  who  let  his  chances  slip.  His  son-in-law,  Boso  of 
Aries,  showed  more  energy,  but  he  was  hopelessly  defeated  by 
the  representative  of  the  German  line,  who  attained  his  goal  in 
879. 

John  VIII.  had  the  wisdom  to  make  a  virtue  of  necessity. 
He  received  the  new  Emperor  with  a  show  of  cordiality,  which 
failed  to  deceive  either  party.  For  three  years  they  maintained 
a  studied  neutrality  under  the  cloak  of  superficial  friendship. 
John,  meanwhile,  showed  remarkable  energy  in  organising  the 
Saracen  campaign,  inspiring  the  formation  of  a  papal  navy,  and 
paving  the  way  for  a  united  stand  in  South  Italy  by  confirming 
the  lukewarm  loyalty  of  the  Southern  ports.  But  the  Emperor 
held  sullenly  aloof,  and  refused  to  join  his  efforts  for  the  salva- 
tion of  Italy  to  those  of  the  Pope. 

John  VIII.  died  in  882 — the  last  of  the  great  Popes  of  the 


84  A  SHOET  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

ninth  century.  He  is  said  to  have  been  poisoned  by%is  enemies 
of  the  German  party.  He  had  done  what  he  could  to  save  the 
Papacy  from  its  inevitable  fate,  but  he  was  just  too  late.  At  the 
beginning  of  his  pontificate,  the  Papacy  was  already  identified 
with  a  party :  at  the  end  it  passed  into  the  hands  of  a  faction. 

During  the  next  ten  years,  Marinus  I.  (882-884)  and  Stephen 
V.  (885-891)  watched  with  powerless  inactivity  the  contest  for  the 
Imperium  between  Guido  of  Spoleto  and  Berengar  of  Friuli — 
both  Carlings  on  the  female  side.  The  whole  of  Italy,  including 
the  Papacy  itself,  became  absorbed  in  the  contemplation  of  a 
guerilla  war  between  two  insignificant  factions,  for  the  pos- 
session of  a  barren  title  to  which  neither  side  had  any  but  the 
most  shadowy  claim.  The  inglorious  struggle  ended  in  the 
Coronation  of  the  Duke  of  Spoleto  in  891,  but  he  died  in  the 
same  year,  leaving  his  dearly-bought  dignity  to  his  young  son, 
Lambert.  The  new  Pope,  Formosus,  who  succeeded  Stephen  in 
891,  after  a  violent  and  aggressive  career,  played  fast  and  loose 
with  Lambert,  professing  to  care  for  him,  and  his  interests  as  a 
father,  while  he  intrigued  behind  his  back  with  Arnulf  of  Ger- 
many. Invited  by  Formosus,  this  Arnulf  suddenly  descended 
on  Italy,  took  Rome,  which  was  inadequately  defended  by  Lam- 
bert's mother,  and  ended  his  meteoric  adventure  in  defeat  after 
a  paralytic  stroke  on  his  way  home.  Formosus  barely  outlived 
Arnulf,  and  met  the  posthumous  reward  of  the  duplicity  of  his 
life  in  the  scandalous  post-mortem  trial  which  disgraces  the 
pontificate  of  Stephen  VI.  (896-897).  Stephen  was  a  staunch  parti- 
san of  Lambert  of  Spoleto,  but  the  act  of  vindictive  sacrilege 
which  makes  his  pontificate  notorious  in  papal  history  is  in  no 
way  characteristic  of  the  chivalrous  young  idol  of  Italy  who 
now  inherited  the  burden  of  the  Imperium.  The  body  of  For- 
mosus, clad  in  pontifical  vestments,  was  submitted  to  a  barbaric 
mock-trial,  and  after  condemnation,  stripped  of  the  ceremonial 
garments,  and  thrown  into  the  Tiber.  But  the  conscience  of 
Rome  was  stricken  by  the  outrage,  and  some  few  priests,  whom 
Formosus  had  consecrated,  ventured  to  defend  the  dishonoured 
memory  of  their  patron.  One  of  these  reminded  the  Romans 
that  it  had  always  been  their  way  to  maltreat  their  benefactors, 
and  put  them  to  death.  The  shaft  went  home :  stung  by  the 
taunt  of  ingratitude,  the  populace  rose  against  Stephen  VI.,  and 
strangled  him  in  the  name  of  Formosus.  He  was  succeeded  by 
Romanus,  of  whom  nothing  is  recorded  but  his  death,  which  oc- 
curred in  the  fourth  month  of  his  pontificate.  His  successor, 
Theodore  II.,  lived  just  long  enough  to  do  honour  to  the  remains 
of  Formosus,  which  were  discovered  by  a  fisherman  in  the  Tiber. 


AEISTOCRATIC  TYRANNY  AND  SUBJECT  POPES     85 

John  IX.  (898-900)  formally  condemned  the  "  Corpse  Synod," 
and  sealed  his  allegiance  to  the  German  party  by  the  coronation 
of  Lambert.  This  accomplished,  Pope  and  Emperor  worked  to- 
gether for  the  restoration  of  law  and  order  in  Rome,  but  the 
premature  death  of  Lambert,  after  a  fall  from  his  horse,  shattered 
the  hopes  of  those  who  had  seen  the  possibility  in  him  of  effect- 
ing a  united  Italy.  His  death  re-opened  the  contest  for  the 
Imperium,  and  his  party  transferred  their  favour  to  Lewis  of 
Provence,  who  could  trace  Carolingian  descent  through  his 
father,  Count  Boeo.  His  opponent,  Bcrengar  of  Friuli,  was 
urged  by  defeat  into  betraying  Italy  to  the  Hungarians,  an  act 
for  which  he  can  no  more  be  held  personally  responsible  than 
those  who  forced  his  hand.  The  decay  of  papal  authority  had 
thrown  Italy  into  the  hands  of  the  nobles,  who  appreciated  the 
idea  of  Italian  unity  as  little  as  they  knew  how  to  effect  it. 

John  IX.  was  succeeded  by  Benedict  IV.  (900-903),  "  a  mild 
and  priest-like  man,"  who  made  no  attempt  to  originate  a  policy, 
and  contented  himself  with  further  cementing  the  papal  allegi- 
ance to  the  German  House  by  crowning  Lewis  of  Provence. 
Leo  v.,  who  succeded  Benedict  in  903,  fell  a  victim  to  the  ambi- 
tion of  Cardinal  Anastasius.  With  him  died  the  eighth  Pope  in 
the  eight  years  of  papal  history.  These  rapid  successions 
showed,  if  proof  were  necessary,  that  papal  power  was  following 
the  Carolingian  Empire  to  its  fall. 

The  death  of  Leo  V.  inaugurates  the  period  of  tyranny  by 
the  civic  nobility,  which  henceforth  put  the  Papacy  into  com- 
mission, maintaining  it  as  a  peg  on  which  to  hang  their  own 
ambitions.  The  household  of  Theophylact  soon  raised  itself 
above  its  equals,  chiefly  owing  to  the  influence  of  two  remark- 
able women.  While  Theophylact  gradually  accumulated  in  his 
own  person  all  the  chief  ofiices  of  the  papal  court,  his  wife, 
Theodora,  by  her  charms  and  her  personality,  held  sway  in 
Rome  with  almost  absolute  authority.  It  was  through  her 
influence  that  the  energetic  villain,  Sergius  II.,  was  elected  to 
the  Papacy  in  904,  having  assisted  himself  in  its  attainment  to 
the  extent  of  effecting  the  death  of  his  two  predecessors.  He 
proved  a  better  Pope  than  might  have  been  expected.  He 
restored  the  bishopric  of  Silva  Candida,  which  the  Saracens  had 
robbed  of  the  sources  of  its  endowment.  He  re-established  the 
Convent  Corsarum,  which  had  suffered  the  same  fate,  on  condition 
that  a  hundred  kyries  should  be  sung  daily  by  the  nuns  for  his 
soul.  We  may  hope  that  the  condition  was  faithfully  kept,  for 
we  owe  to  him  the  re-building  of  the  Lateran,  and  the  preservation 
of  all  that  it  holds  of  historic  interest  and  decorative  beauty. 


86  A  SHOET  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

Sergius  II.  was  succeeded  by  two  insignificant  men,  Anastasius, 
the  Roman  (911-913),  and  Lands,  a  Lombard  (913-914),  who  doubt- 
less placed  their  bishopric  at  the  disposal  of  the  wife  of  Theophy- 
lact.  The  sway  of  Theodora  was  now  shared  by  her  more 
beautiful  daughter  Marozia,  who  through  the  instrumentality  of 
three  successive  husbands  controlled  the  history  of  Rome  and 
the  Papacy  for  the  next  fifteen  years.  Since  the  days  of  Eudoxia 
and  Amalasuntha,  there  had  been  a  conspicuous  absence  of 
prominent  women  in  the  records  of  the  city,  and  their  reappear- 
ance at  this  time  is  significant.  Mediaeval  Rome  was  a  clerical 
city,  and  the  ascendancy  of  Theodora  and  Marozia  testifies  to  a 
temporary  triumph  of  secularism  over  the  ecclesiastical  system. 
There  was  nothing  noble  in  the  tyranny  which  these  two  women 
exercised  over  the  afi'airs  of  the  city.  No  large  political  issues 
dignified  their  intrigues,  and  all  their  fascinations  and  wiles  were 
exercised  in  the  service  of  their  personal  gratification.  The 
moral  decadence  of  the  society  which  they  created  has  never 
been  surpassed,  but  their  vices  lacked  distinction,  and  their 
sway  had  none  of  the  brilliance  which  has  often  accompanied 
the  decadent  phases  of  European  history. 

Theodora's  influence  did  however  justify  itself  in  the  appoint- 
ment to  the  Papacy  of  John  X.  (914-928),  who  was  possibly  her 
lover,  and  certainly  the  first  statesman  of  his  age.  About  the 
same  time  Marozia  married  Alberic,  a  German  soldier  of  fortune, 
who  is  known  to  history  as  the  forerunner  of  the  "  condottieri," 
who  play  so  large  a  part  in  the  story  of  Italy.  Through  these 
two  men — the  Pope  and  the  warrior — the  influence  of  the  wife 
and  daughter  of  Theophylact  made  itself  paramount  in  the 
immediate  future.  With  remarkable  activity  John  devoted 
himself  to  the  Saracen  war.  He  formed  a  league  with  the 
turbulent  nobles  of  the  South,  and  even  enlisted  the  help  of  the 
Eastern  Emperor,  who  had  by  now  forgotten  to  bear  his  grudge 
against  Italy.  With  Alberic  as  his  vice-gerent,  the  Pope  gained 
a  memorable  series  of  victories  in  the  valley  of  the  Garigliane, 
which  resulted  in  the  expulsion  of  the  enemy  from  South  Italy. 
John  and  Alberic  returned  in  triumph  to  Rome,  conscious  of 
having  carried  through  between  them  a  great  enterprise,  and 
earned  the  gratitude  of  their  countrymen.  But  Rome  was  sunk 
too  low  to  do  her  patriots  honour,  and  a  vortex  of  political 
intrigue  swept  away  the  fortunes  of  the  two  heroes  of  the 
Saracen  campaign. 

In  order  to  gratify  the  Imperial  sentiment  of  the  people, 
Theodora  and  the  Pope  had  summoned  Berengar  of  Friuli  to 
take  up  the  Imperium  which  had  lain  useless  and  idle  in  tlie 


AEISTOCKATIC  TYRANNY  AND  SUBJECT  POPES     87 

hands  of  Lewis  of  Provence.  In  915,  Berengar  entered  Rome 
and  was  received  with  a  magnificence  worthy  of  a  nobler  epoch. 
While  the  scholae  sang  their  "  laudes,"  two  goodly  youths 
advanced  to  do  homage  to  the  Emperor-elect.  These  were  the 
son  of  Theophylact  and  the  brother  of  the  Pope,  and  in  their 
joint  act  Berengar  might  read  the  symbol  of  Roman  society. 
For  eight  years  Berengar  passively  carried  on  the  tradition  of 
the  Western  Empire,  until  he  was  assassinated  in  924  by  his  son- 
in-law,  Adalbert.  The  death  of  Berengar  marks  the  extinction  of 
the  Empire  as  a  national  concern.  The  temporal  leadership  of 
Europe  had  passed  away  from  Italy  for  ever.  The  very  title  of 
Emperor,  which  had  lingered  on  so  persistently  after  the  Empire 
had  fallen  to  pieces,  was  henceforth  sufifered  to  lapse.  The 
"  dark  ages"  were  dark  indeed  in  the  hour  when  the  eternity  of 
the  Roman  Empire  waB  forgotten. 

Rudolf  ot  Burgundy  retained  the  Crown  of  Italy  for  three 
years  after  the  death  of  Berengar,  and  was  then  overthrown  by 
Irmengard,  the  daughter  of  Berengar,  who  is  said  to  have 
rivalled  Cleopatra  by  her  chai*m,  and  outshone  in  physical 
beauty  her  contemporary  Marozia.  The  Pope  joined  Irmengard 
in  espousing  the  cause  of  her  step-brother  Hugo,  and  thus  brought 
about  his  own  ruin.  The  personal  ascendancy  of  another 
woman  in  Italy  stung  Marozia  into  opposition.  The  death  of 
Alberic  had  left  her  free  to  offer  her  band  to  Guido  of  Tuscany, 
another  son  of  the  late  Emperor,  who  could  boast  as  good  a 
claim  to  the  Empire  as  his  step-brother  Hugo.  In  the  interests 
of  Guido,  Marozia  plotted  to  bring  about  the  fall  of  John  X. 
For  two  years  longer  he  managed  to  hold  his  own  through  the 
support  of  his  brother  Peter,  but  a  surprise  attack  on  the  Lateran, 
in  928,  finally  overwhelmed  him.  He  lingered  a  year  in  a 
dungeon  in  the  Castle  of  St.  Angelo,  where  he  closed  his  brilliant 
career  in  a  manner  which  was  becoming  characteristic  of  the 
Popes. 

After  two  Popes,  concerning  whom  we  know  nothing  at  all — 
Leo  VI.  and  Stephen  VII. — Marozia  achieved  the  climax  of  her 
ambition  in  the  election  of  her  son  to  the  Papacy  as  John  XL 
(931-936).  Her  third  marriage  in  the  following  year  was  the 
initial  step  which  brought  her  to  ruin.  Her  third  husband  was 
the  same  Hugo  whom  she  had  formerly  opposed — the  prot^g^  of 
her  rival,  and  the  opponent  of  the  late  lamented  Guido.  Hugo 
was  typical  of  his  age,  bold  and  brutal,  with  an  outward  show  of 
chivalry  and  piety  which  belied  every  action  which  is  recorded 
of  him.  He  found  his  worst  enemy  in  his  young  step-son,  the 
boy  Alberic,  whom  his  mother  unwisely  pressed  into  the  service 


88     A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

of  her  new  lord.  A  trivial  quarrel  turned  the  sullen  hatred  of 
Alberic  into  open  hostility,  which  rapidly  developed  into  re- 
bellion. Inciting  the  mob  against  the  tyranny  of  his  mother, 
Alberic  overthrew  Hugo,  who  fled  in  ignominy  from  the  city, 
and  seized  and  imprisoned  both  Marozia  and  his  brother  the 
young  Pope.  Alberic  held  the  reins  of  government  as  "  Prince 
and  Senator  of  all  the  Romans  ".  In  spite  of  the  verdict  of  con- 
temporary records,  the  dictatorship  of  Alberic  was  by  no  means 
a  calamity  for  the  city.  It  is  true  that  he  deprived  the  Papacy 
of  all  its  temporal  power,  and  kept  his  brother  the  Pope  in 
honourable  captivity.  But  the  political  tutelage  of  the  Church 
gave  it  its  chance  to  recover  from  the  moral  degradation  which 
the  association  of  the  Papacy  with  the  House  of  Theophylact 
had  brought  about.  The  subjection  of  the  Popes  to  Alberic  was 
a  salutary  humiliation ;  it  drove  theni  back  to  look  for  their 
spiritual  weapons,  and  finding  them  blunted  by  lack  of  use,  they 
turned  to  the  armoury  of  moral  reform.  The  death  of  his 
brother  John  XI.  enabled  Alberic  to  elect  in  his  stead  a  tractable 
Benedictine  Pope,  whose  conception  of  the  papal  ofiice  coincided 
wiih  his  own.  Leo  VII.  (936-939)  cheerfully  renounced  all  claim 
to  temporal  power,  and  espoused  the  cause  of  the  new  monastic 
reform,  which  was  fraught  with  importance  for  the  future  of 
papal  history. 

More  than  a  ■  century  of  deterioration  had  reduced  the 
Benedictine  rule  to  a  dead  letter,  and  brought  the  monasteries 
to  a  condition  which  awoke  a  sense  of  tragedy  in  the  generation 
of  Odo  of  Cluny.  In  the  tenth  century,  which  is  comparable  in 
this  and  in  other  respects  to  the  fifteenth,  ideas  were  all  in  the 
crucible,  and  it  was  doubtful  what  would  emerge.  The  monastic 
vocation  was  no  longer  taken  for  granted  as  a  guarantee  of  future 
salvation  ;  it  was  bound  up  too  closely  with  the  mystic  conception 
of  spiritual  dominion,  which  the  Imperium  had  gone  far  to 
eclipse.  Charles  the  Great  had  helped  the  monasteries  down- 
ward by  the  practice  of  bestowing  them  as  fiefs  on  lay  barons, 
and  the  Saracen  raids  had  completed  the  work  which  the  forces 
of  secularism  had  begun. 

That  a  reaction  set  in  early  in  the  tenth  century  was  due 
partly  to  the  political  necessity  of  finding  a  raison  d'etre  for  the 
Church  which  had  been  deprived  of  all  its  worldly  power,  and 
partly  to  the  individual  efibrts  of  Odo  of  Cluny.  The  Loyola  of 
his  age,  Odo  travelled  about  in  France  and  Italy  preaching  the 
cause  of  the  new  monasticism,  pointing  to  Monte  Cassino  and 
Subiaco,  and  contrasting  the  ignoble  present  with  the  glorious 
past.      Cluniac   reform   became  the  watchword  of    the  hour: 


ARISTOCRATIC  TYRANNY  AND  SUBJECT  POPES     89 

Leo  VII.  brought  it  to  Rome,  and  Alberic  associated  it  with  his 
policy  of  government.  The  bandit  monks  of  Farfa,  who  used 
their  charter  as  a  pretext  for  licentious  living,  and  terrorised  the 
countryside  with  their  lawless  rapacity,  were  forcibly  expelled 
from  their  haunts,  and  in  time  at  least  Italy  was  purged  from 
the  worst  evils  of  corrupt  monasticism. 

After  Leo  VII.,  three  more  Popes  were  created  by  Alberic, 
reigning  at  his  discretion,  and  according  to  his  political 
principles.  Stephen  VIII.  (939-942)  seems  to  have  been  un- 
fortunate, and  suffered  mutilation  probably  in  an  attempt  to 
shake  off  the  yoke  of  Alberic.  In  any  case  his  enterprise  failed, 
and  we  read  that  he  took  refuge  in  solitude  and  misanthropy. 
Stephen  was  succeeded  by  Marinus  II.  (942-946),  "  a  gentle  and 
peace-loving  man,"  who  never  swerved  in  his  obedience  to  the 
secular  master  of  Rome.  Under  Agapitus  II.  (946-955),  the  first 
symptom  ot  unrest  made  itself  felt,  in  the  assumption  of  the 
title  of  King  of  Italy  by  Berengar  of  Ivrea.  His  project  was 
merely  the  signal  for  a  mightier  than  he  to  approach.  Invited 
by  the  Pope  to  deliver  Italy  from  Berengar,  Otto  the  Great 
began  to  rebuild  in  his  mind  the  Empire  of  Charlemagne.  At 
the  same  time  the  power  of  Alberic  tottered  and  fell.  He 
succeeded  before  he  died  in  securing  the  election  of  his  son 
Octavian  to  the  Papacy  as  John  XII.  But  a  self-willed  boy  of 
sixteen,  with  his  character  already  undermined  by  his  training 
in  luxury,  was  no  fit  successor  to  a  beneficent  despot,  whose 
only  claim  to  his  subjects'  obedience  was  his  power  to  make 
himself  acceptable  to  them. 


CHAPTER  XI 

THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  REFORM  :  THE  POPES  AND  THE  OTTOS, 

A.D.  955-1046 

THE  fundamental  weakness  which  underlay  the  conception 
of  the  mediaeval  Papacy  was  its  inability  to  stand  alone. 
Spiritual  authority  was  insufficient  by  itself  to  secure 
the  supremacy  of  Rome :  the  claims  of  St.  Peter — even  when 
they  were  advanced  by  the  worthiest  of  his  successors — required 
the  weight  of  the  Roman  Empire  to  give  them  force.  Temporal 
power  in  the  tenth  century  was  merely  an  expression.  The 
Donations  and  Deeds  of  Gift,  however  generous  they  might 
appear  on  paper,  always  contained  an  implied  condition.  The 
King  or  the  Emperor  bestowed  the  lands — in  so  far  as  they  were 
his  to  give :  they  became  the  property  of  the  Church,  provided 
the  Pope  could  make  good  his  possession. 

Hence  the  Papacy  continually  found  itself  on  the  horns  of  a 
dilemma.  Obliged  by  the  nature  of  things  to  take  refuge  behind 
a  privileged  defender,  the  Popes  had  to  choose  between  the 
perpetual  domination  of  some  adjacent  or  co-existing  authority 
and  the  intermittent  protection  of  a  strong  exterior  power.  If 
the  one  was  inconveniently  near,  the  other  was  obviously  too  far 
away.  Viewed  in  the  light  of  a  protector,  the  civic  nobility  of 
Rome  was  more  effective  than  the  distant  German  King,  but 
protection  and  oppression  were  too  often  interchangeable  terms, 
and  if  the  Alps  formed  an  obstacle  in  the  way  of  the  former, 
they  were  no  less  a  defence  against  the  latter. 

The  interest  of  the  tenth  century  lies  in  the  fluctuation  of 
the  papal  fortunes  between  these  two  alternatives.  There  was 
also  a  third,  but  the  times  were  too  barbarous,  and  political 
thought  was  too  crude  to  do  it  justice.  The  cause  of  nationalism, 
as  represented  by  Lambert  of  Spoleto,  and  at  this  particular 
juncture  by  Berengar  of  Ivrea,  never  had  any  real  chance  of 
success.  Italy  was  racially  too  diffuse  and  geographically  too 
incoherent  for  the  consciousness  of  national  unity  to  gain  any 
real  hold :  besides,  there  was  nothing  in  the  idea  which  appealed 
%o  the  mind  of  the  tenth  century  Italian.    The  Roman  Empire 


THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  KEFORM  91 

was  a  cause  to  die  for — so  was  the  Universal  Church — so  also  in 
its  way  was  the  principle  of  disorder — lawleesness — rebellion — 
and  the  exhilarating  strife  of  factions.  But  the  lord  of  Ivrea 
with  his  handful  of  knights — who  was  he  that  the  Tuscan 
peasants  should  flock  to  his  standard,  or  the  nobles  of  the 
Campagna  set  aside  their  own  feuds  in  his  service  ?  If  the  Pope 
wanted  a  protector,  let  him  appeal  to  Csesar  across  the  Alps,  and 
let  Rome  delight  once  more  in  the  splendour  of  an  Imperial 
Coronation,  with  its  inevitable  sequel  of  carnage  in  the  streets. 

Thus  the  appeal  to  Otto  the  Great  was  urgent  in  its  demand 
and  general  in  the  direction  from  which  it  came.  Invited  first 
by  Agapitus  in  951,  Otto  had  justified  his  German  reputation  in 
the  defeat  of  Berengar  of  Ivrea,  whe  fell  back  at  his  approach 
without  making  a  stand.  With  the  vision  of  Charles  already 
before  his  eyes.  Otto  proposed  to  press  on  to  Rome,  and  sent 
envoys  to  the  Pope  to  arrange  for  his  reception.  But  Alberic  had 
not  yet  made  over  his  power  to  his  son,  and  the  would-be 
Emperor  was  met  with  a  flat  refusal  from  the  Senator  of  Rome. 
Otto  recognised  that  his  attempt  was  premature :  he  therefore 
contented  himself  with  consolidating  his  interests  in  North 
Italy  by  completing  the  subjection  of  Berengar,  and  by 
marrying  Adelaide,  the  widow  of  the  late  King  Lothar,  who  had 
headed  in  her  own  name  the  invitation  which  had  brought  the 
German  King  to  Italy. 

The  son  of  Alberic  afforded  to  Otto  the  opportunity  which  his 
father  had  denied.  The  young  Octavian,  already  "  Prince  and 
Senator,"  succeeded  Agapetas  as  Pope  just  before  the  death  of 
his  father,  in  954,  taking  the  name  of  John  XII.  Anyone  might 
have  staggered  under  the  weight  of  so  crushing  a  burden  of 
power,  and  the  boy-Pope  had  not  even  passed  through  the  ordi- 
nary apprenticeship  of  government.  He  brought  to  his  task  a 
considerable  amount  of  natural  energy,  which  might,  under 
more  favourable  circumstances,  have  developed  into  a  real 
capacity  for  ruling.  But  whatever  he  might  have  become,  he 
certainly  showed  no  signs  of  fulfilling  any  promise  except  that 
which  his  precocious  vices  foretold.  He  opened  his  pontificate 
with  a  disastrous  expedition  against  the  southern  duchies,  which 
induced  him  to  summon  Otto  to  the  rescue.  Meanwhile,  his 
enemies  were  bringing  their  influence  to  bear  in  the  same  direc- 
tion, and  a  formidable  list  of  charges  against  the  Pope  was  com- 
piled for  his  undoing. 

Otto  came  to  Pavia  in  961,  and  received  the  various  embassies 
of  his  Italian  well-wishers.  The  indictment  of  John  he  brushed 
aside  with   half-humorous   contempt:    "he  is  a  boy:  the  ex- 


92  A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

ample  of  good  men  may  reform  him  ".  Early  in  January,  962, 
Otto  journeyed  to  Rome,  having  sworn  to  keep  faith  with  his 
young  host,  who,  in  return,  undertook  to  hold  no  dealings  with 
Berengar,  or  his  son,  Adalbert.  In  spite  of  the  apparent  under- 
standing. Otto  was  ill  at  ease  in  Rome.  Even  at  the  time  of 
the  Coronation  itself,  he  ordered  Ansfried  of  Louvain  to  stand 
near  and  protect  him  with  his  spear  as  he  knelt  before  St.  Peter's 
tomb.  His  suspicions,  moreover,  were  not  without  foundation. 
Hardly  had  he  left  the  city  when  the  Pope,  chafing  under  the 
yoke  of  his  protector,  which,  as  usual,  proved  irksome  at  close 
quarters,  re-opened  his  intrigues  with  Berengar,  and  with 
scarcely  veiled  treachery  threw  off  his  allegiance  to  the  Emperor 
whom  he  had  just  crowned. 

The  result  of  this  was  Otto's  second  expedition  to  Rome  in 
963.  He  arrived  to  find  the  city  in  a  state  of  unwonted  quiet : 
John  XII.  had  gone  off  hunting — his  most  serious  offence  in  the 
eyes  of  his  critics  ! — and  the  Cardinals  and  Bishops  were  ready 
to  submit  his  conduct  to  the  Emperor.  The  tenth  century 
showed  no  leniency  towards  wild  oats.  The  accusation  against 
the  boy-Pope  brought  before  Otto  was  long  and  serious  enough  to 
cover  the  career  of  a  veteran.  A  considerable  number  of  real 
crimes,  and  a  pitiable  proportion  of  vices,  were  brought  to  his 
charge  ;  but  the  emphasis  was  laid  in  almost  every  case  on  the 
follies  and  neglects  which  were  the  natural  outcome  of  his  train- 
ing in  despotism,  and  his  youth.  He  had  neglected  to  attend 
matins, — he  had  not  been  frequent  at  Mass.  He  had  devoted 
his  time  to  field  sports  and  amours.  He  had  "  drunk  to  Venus 
and  other  devils  "  in  a  Lateran  orgy.  In  short,  he  had  proved 
himself  unworthy  of  the  pontificate  in  all  that  he  had  done  and 
said. 

Otto  summoned  the  Pope  in  respectful  language  three  times, 
and  eventually  received  a  reply  from  the  hunting-field,  which 
was  both  spirited  and  illiterate :  "John  Bishop,  servant  of  the 
servants  of  God,  to  all  the  bishops — We  have  heard  that  you 
want  to  appoint  another  Pope.  If  you  do  so,  I  will  excommuni- 
cate you  by  Almighty  God,  and  you  shall  not  ordinate  nobody,  or 
celebrate  Mass.'' 

John's  ultimatum,  thus  crudely  expressed,  left  Otto  no  choice 
but  to  depose  him  "  because  of  his  reprobate  life  ".  In  his  place 
Otto  appointed  Leo  VIII.,  a  man  of  indecisive  character  and 
blameless  reputation,  who  was  unable  to  hold  his  own  against 
the  hostile  forces  of  the  anti-German  party.  It  was  probably 
at  this  time  that  Otto  was  supposed  to  have  deprived  the 
Romans  of  their  rights,   by  enforcing  upon  them  an  oath  by 


THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  EEFOKM  93 

which  they  undertook  not  to  elect  or  ordain  any  Pope  without 
his  or  his  son's  consent.  The  Pope  designate,  moreover,  waB  to 
swear  allegiance  to  the  Emperor  in  the  presence  of  the  Imperial 
Missi.  The  form  of  the  oath,  as  far  as  can  be  judged  from  the 
rather  meagre  accounts  of  the  chroniclers,  was,  however,  identi- 
cal with  that  which  Lothar  imposed  in  824.  Why,  then,  does 
Liutprand,  the  biographer  of  Otto,  emphasise  the  surrender  of 
electoral  rights  by  the  Roman  people  in  964  ?  It  seems  prob- 
able that  the  innovation  belonged  rather  to  the  region  of  fact 
than  of  theory,  and  even  the  practical  change  was  probably 
over-estimated  by  the  Imperial  biographer.  The  theory  re- 
mained the  same  as  in  the  time  of  Lothar,  but  since  the  year 
824,  no  Emperor  had  been  strong  enough  to  make  good  his 
claim  to  supersede  the  electoral  rights  of  the  people.  This,  at 
least,  is  a  possible  solution  of  the  difficult  problem  which  the 
so-called  Privilege  of  Otto  suggests.  In  return  for  the  conces- 
sion— whether  it  was  new  or  founded  upon  precedent — Otto  con- 
firmed the  previous  donations  which  gave  to  the  Papacy  the 
Duchy  of  Rome,  part  of  the  Sabine  and  Tuscan  territory,  and 
the  exarchate  of  Ravenna.  To  this  was  to  be  added  the  Cam- 
pagna,  with  the  "  restitution  "  of  Naples,  and  Gaeta,  Fundi,  and 
Sicily,  as  soon  as  they  could  be  conquered  from  the  Saracens. 

In  964,  John  XII.  returned  to  Rome,  and  began  to  rally  his 
forces.  The  anti-German  party  had  been  growing  in  strength 
ever  since  Otto's  Coronation,  and  Leo  VIII.,  unable  to  stand 
against  it,  was  obliged  to  fly  for  protection  to  Otto.  But  John 
XII.  could  not  concentrate  his  energies  for  decisive  action.  An 
amorous  adventure  cost  him  his  life  just  at  the  moment  when 
he  had  regained  his  undeserved  ascendancy  in  Rome.  The 
sword  of  an  injured  husband  freed  Rome  from  the  tyranny  of 
the  last  of  the  Theophylacts,  and  the  Papacy  from  the  ignominy 
which  his  reckless,  if  not  altogether  responsible,  profligacy  had 
brought  upon  it. 

To  fill  his  place  as  anti-pope,  his  partisans  elected  the  gram- 
maticus  Benedict  V.  Otto,  however,  descended  on  the  distracted 
city,  and  replaced  Leo  VIII.  for  a  few  more  months  of  sovereignty, 
carrying  back  to  Germany  in  triumph  the  ex-king,  Berengar, 
and  the  would-be  anti-pope. 

Leo  VIII.  barely  survived  his  restoration.  He  was  succeeded 
by  another  descendent  of  Theophylact,  who  so  far  departed  from 
the  tradition  of  his  House  that  he  reigned  as  the  candidate  of 
the  German  party,  and,  like  his  predecessor,  was  driven  to  take 
refuge  at  the  side  of  Otto  from  the  revolution  which  convulsed 
the  city  soon  after  his  election.      A  counter-revolution  in  the 


94  A  SHOET  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

following  year,  however,  enabled  the  new  Pope,  John  XIII.,  to 
return  to  Rome,  supported  by  the  rumour  that  Otto  was  pre- 
paring for  an  expedition  against  the  city.  The  clemency  of  the 
Emperor  had  been  tried  too  long  by  the  instability  of  Rome,  and 
he  set  out,  for  the  fourth  time,  with  vengeance  in  his  train.  The 
authors  of  the  rebellion  were  mutilated  and  put  to  death,  and 
Peter  the  Prefect  was  hung  by  the  hair  from  the  equestrian 
statue  of  Marcus  Aurelius. 

Soon  after  the  suppression  of  this  revolt,  John  XIII.  found  a 
surer  means  of  securing  his  position  in  the  city.  In  spite  of 
the  energy  of  Otto,  Imperial  protection  had  broken  down  :  John, 
therefore,  turned  to  the  alternative  force  of  defence,  and  intro- 
duced a  new  factor  in  the  complicated  balance  of  Papal -Imperial 
politics  by  his  alliance  with  the  House  of  Crescentius.  During 
the  next  half  century,  the  Crescentines  play  less  conspicuously, 
and,  on  the  whole,  more  creditably,  the  part  which  the  Theophy- 
lacts  had  played  in  an  earlier  generation.  But  whereas  Theophy- 
lact  had  founded  the  supremacy  of  his  House  by  making  the 
Popes  his  creatures,  Crescentius  of  the  Marble  Horse  owed  his 
personal  ascendancy,  and  the  subsequent  fortunes  of  his  family, 
to  the  patronage  of  John  XIII.  John's  plan  was  to  dwarf  the 
hostile  nobility  of  Rome  by  deliberately  raising  one  House 
above  the  rest.  He  did  not  foresee  the  danger  which  inevit- 
ably underlay  his  policy,  and  he  did  not  live  long  enough  to 
learn  it  by  experience. 

The  last  recorded  act  of  John  XIII.  was  the  marriage  of  the 
Emperor's  son.  Otto,  whom  he  had  already  crowned  co-Emperor, 
with  the  Eastern  princess  Theophano.  The  wedding  was  both 
picturesque  and  momentous.  Otto  had  long  been  suing  for 
her  hand,  but  the  father  of  Theophano,  Nicephorus  Phocas,  had 
haughtily  withheld  his  consent.  Her  stepfather,  John  Zimisces, 
who  had  supplanted  her  parent,  was  more  amenable,  and  in  972 
the  beautiful  sixteen-year-old  bride  was  conducted  with  great 
honour  to  her  husband  in  Rome.  Otto  II.  was  a  clever  and 
attractive  youth  of  seventeen,  with  the  heart  of  a  hero  concealed 
in  his  small,  slight  body. 

In  the  same  year  John  XIII.  died  and  was  succeeded,  after  an 
interval  of  schism,  by  Benedict  VI.  (973-974),  who  owed  his 
security  on  the  throne  of  S.  Peter  to  the  last  efforts  of  Otto  the 
Great. 

Otto  himself  died  in  May  of  the  same  year.  His  achievements 
were  great,  but  their  character  was  purely  personal.  His 
dominion  was  an  empire  only  in  name  :  Germany  was  distracted 
by  feudal  and  national  forces  which  his  constitution  had  been 


THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  KEFORM  95 

unable  to  touch ;  Italy  had  summoned  him  in  her  hour  of 
need  and  resented  it  when  he  answered  her  call.  Like  his  fore- 
runner, Charlemagne,  he  had  been  invited  by  the  Pope,  and  like 
him  had  subjugated  the  Papacy.  But  the  Popes  of  the  ninth 
century  had  instantly  set  to  work  to  emancipate  themselves, 
whereas  the  Papacy  under  the  Ottos  was  not  in  a  position  to  do 
so.  The  dirge  of  the  monk  of  Soracte  gives  a  clue  to  the  senti- 
ment of  the  Italian  who  watched  from  the  Campagna  the 
descents  of  the  German  kings — "  Woe  to  Rome  !  oppressed  and 
down-trodden  by  so  many  nations.  Thou  art  taken  captive  by 
the  Saxon  king,  thy  people  are  judged  by  the  sword.  .  .  .  Thou 
who  wast  a  mother  art  become  a  daughter — thou  wast  too 
beautiful  "  (Benedict  of  Soracte). 

The  death  of  Otto  was  the  signal  for  rebellion  in  Rome  against 
German  domination  as  personified  by  Benedict  VI.  The  Cres- 
centii  soon  gave  proof  of  the  dangerous  eminence  to  which  John 
XIII.  had  raised  them.  Headed  by  Crescentius  de  Theodora  the 
rebels  seized  the  unfortunate  Pope  and  strangled  him  in  the 
castle  of  S.  Angelo.  In  his  place  they  put  forward  the  "  monster  " 
Boniface  VII.,  the  son  of  Ferrucius.  The  subsequent  events  of 
the  rebellion  are  unknown  to  us.  There  seems  to  have  been  a 
reaction,  which  led  to  the  flight  of  Boniface  to  Byzantium  and 
the  election  of  the  pious  Bishop  of  Sutri  by  the  Emperor  Otto  II. 
Benedict  VII.  (974-983)  was  a  zealous  champion  of  Cluniac 
reform,  and  his  pontificate  seems  to  have  been  entirely  taken  up 
with  the  restoration  of  monasteries,  particvdarly  of  the  influential 
and  beautiful  House  dedicated  to  SS.  Boniface  and  Alexis,  which 
was  destined  to  become  the  source  of  Slavonic  evangelisation. 

In  980  Otto  II.  came  in  peace  to  Rome.  Benedict  VII.  had  en- 
treated him  to  come  and  deliver  south  Italy  from  the  Saracens, 
who  were  pressing  harder  than  ever  on  the  papal  frontiers.  The 
Greeks,  moreover,  were  engaged  in  an  attempt  to  recover  Capua 
and  Benevento,  and  the  situation  was  desperate  enough  to 
demand  instant  alleviation. 

The  expedition  of  Otto  was  not  fortunate.  He  was  defeated 
by  the  Saracens  at  Stilo,  and  narrowly  escaped  being  kidnapped 
by  the  Greeks  in  a  naval  enterprise  in  which  he  had  shown  ex- 
cessive personal  daring.  He  rejoined  the  Pope  at  Verona,  where 
the  infant  Otto  III.  was  crowned  by  Benedict  VII.  just  before 
his  death  in  983.  The  death  of  the  Pope  recalled  Otto  to  Rome, 
where  he  negotiated  the  election  of  his  chancellor,  Peter  of  Pavia, 
as  John  XIV.  (983-984).  Exhausted  by  the  excessive  demand 
which  Italy  had  made  on  the  delicate  young  Emperor,  Otto  II. 
died  in  Rome  in  the  winter  of  his  twenty-eighth  year,  and,  alone 


96  A  SHOET  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

of  all  the  German  Emperors  of  Rome,  was  buried  in  the  crypt  of 
St.  Peter's. 

John  XIV.  must  have  trembled  for  his  own  safety  as  he  stood 
by  the  grave  of  Otto  II.  Germany  demanded  the  instant  return 
of  the  child  Otto  III.  and  the  Imperial  regent  Theophano..  and 
already  the  inevitable  anti-German  spirit  was  making  itself  felt 
in  Rome.  Early  in  984,  the  anti-pope  Boniface  VII.,  who  had 
fled  to  Byzantium  at  the  end  of  the  Crescentine  revolt,  reappeared 
in  Rome  and,  supported  by  a  faction  of  malcontents,  seized  John 

XIV.  The  unfortunate  Pope  was  thrown  into  a  dungeon  in 
St.  Angelo,  and  having  failed  to  die,  he  was  strangled  after  four 
months'  captivity.  Boniface  VII.  was,  however,  overthrown  him- 
self in  the  following  year  by  the  Crescentii,  who  conducted 
a  counter-revolution  in  the  name  of  the  national  party.  It  is 
difficult  to  follow  the  sequence  of  events,  but  the  Crescentii 
cannot  have  been  uniformly  successful  at  first,  for  in  985  John 

XV.  succeeded  to  the  Papacy,  and  is  described  as  hostile  to 
Crescentius  and  favourable  to  the  German  party.  Things 
must  have  moved  rapidly,  however,  for  in  the  same  year,  Cres- 
centius succeeded  in  making  himself  Patricius  of  Rome,  and  in 
his  own  person  tried  to  restore  the  dictatorship  of  Alberic.  But 
he  lacked  either  the  self-confidence  or  the  audacity  of  his  greater 
prototype,  for  his  attitude  towards  Theophano,  when  she  came 
in  the  name  of  Otto  III.  to  Rome  in  989,  was  as  deferential  and 
subservient  as  Imperial  arrogance  could  demand.  On  the  other 
hand,  his  actual  position  in  Rome  was  little  short  of  sovereignty. 
The  envoys  of  Hugh  Capet,  the  founder  of  the  Capetian  dynasty 
in  France,  complained  that  it  was  impossible  to  get  even  a 
hearing  from  the  Pope  unless  one  brought  presents  for  the 
"  tyrant "  Crescentius. 

The  position  of  John  XV.  finally  became  untenable.  He 
fled  from  Rome  to  Count  Hugo  of  Tuscany — a  strong  Imperialist, 
who  forthwith  summoned  the  boy  Otto.  With  the  spirit  of  a 
Csesar  and  the  temperament  of  a  saint,  the  figure  of  Otto  III.  is 
one  of  the  most  pathetic  which  European  history  presents. 
Belonging,  as  it  has  been  said,  to  the  realm  of  poetry  rather  than 
of  history,  he  seemed  destined  by  nature  and  by  circumstance 
to  failure  and  disillusionment.  His  heart  beat  high  in 
anticipation  as  he  set  out  in  996  to  visit  the  city  of  his  dreams. 
He  was  going  to  rescue  the  Church — to  restore  the  Empire ;  he 
was  Csesar — he  was  Constantino  ;  he  was  going  to  rebuild  the 
walls  of  Jerusalem.     And  he  was  fifteen  years  old. 

Crescentius  proved  himself  all  that  was  compliant,  and  no 
hint  of  aristocratic  opposition  mare  the  epic  character  which 


THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  REFOEM  97 

Otto  was  so  anxious  to  maintain  on  this  momentous  occasion. 
Before  the  Imperial  coronation  had  taken  place,  and  as  if  to  give 
the  young  Emperor  full  scope  to  inaugurate  a  new  era,  John  XV. 
died.  With  Otto  was  his  cousin  Bruno,  his  kindred  spirit  and 
chosen  companion,  who  shared  his  dreams  and  understood  his 
ideals.  The  boy-Emperor  saw  no  drawback  in  the  appointment 
of  a  pious  and  courageous  youth  to  be  his  coadjutor  in  the 
reformation  of  Christendom,  and  if  he  had  lived  long  enough, 
Gregory  V.  would  almost  certainly  have  justified  his  confidence. 

To  Gregory,  imbued  with  Cluniac  traditions,  and  afire  with 
young  intolerance,  the  condition  of  the  Papacy  as  he  found  it 
was  a  matter  for  tears.  It  was  not  without  justification  that 
Arnulf  of  Orleans  had  dissuaded  the  synod  of  Rheims  from 
appealing  in  995  to  Rome.  His  recapitulation  of  papal  history 
was  a  substantial  apology  for  tenth  century  "  Protestantism  " : 
"0  unfortunate  Rome,  in  the  silence  of  the  past  thou  gavest  our 
ancestors  the  light  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Church.  Our  times, 
however,  thou  hast  darkened  with  a  night  so  terrible  as  shall 
make  them  notorious  even  in  the  future.  Once  thou  gavest  us 
the  renowned  Leos,  the  great  Gregories  .  .  .  What  have  we  not 
witnessed  in  these  days?  We  have  seen  John,  surnamed 
Octavian,  wallowing  in  the  mire  of  sensuality,  and  even  conspiring 
against  Otto  whom  he  himself  had  crowned.  .  .  .  Emperor  Otto 
was  succeeded  by  Emperor  Otto,  who  excelled  all  princes  in 
arms,  in  wisdom,  and  in  knowledge.  A  dreadful  monster,  how- 
ever, dripping  with  the  blood  of  his  predecessor,  filled  the  chair 
of  Peter :  Boniface,  a  man  who  in  criminality  surpassed  the  rest 
of  mankind."  The  invective  concludes  with  the  condemnation 
of  the  unworthy  Pope  as  "an  idol  in  God's  Temple,  from  whom 
we  may  as  well  expect  oracles  as  from  a  block  of  stone". 

To  the  challenge  of  the  Galilean  Bishop,  the  Synod  of 
St.  Peters,  summoned  by  the  two  boy-leaders  of  Europe  after 
Otto's  coronation,  was  in  some  measure  an  answer.  Before 
dealing  with  general  abuses,  political  order  was  restored  by  the 
trial  of  CrescentiuB.  The  rebel  noble  was  first  banished,  and 
then  pardoned,  by  an  indiscreet  act  of  royal  clemency.  The  result 
was  that  as  soon  as  Otto  had  left  the  city,  the  rebellion  broke 
out  again  with  renewed  vigour,  and  Crescentius  had  merely  re- 
gathered  his  forces  in  the  interval  of  peace.  Gregory  V.  escaped 
to  Pavia,  where  his  calm  and  dignified  behaviour  set  an  example 
which  other  Popes  in  parallel  dilemmas  would  have  done  well  to 
follow.  He  wasted  no  words  in  useless  recrimination,  but 
contented  himself  with  simply  excommunicating  Crescentius, 
and  instead  of  giving  way  to  hysterical  panic,  he  transacted  his 

7 


98  A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

official  business,  received  envoys,  and  arbitrated  in  European 
politics  as  he  would  have  done  in  his  Roman  palace. 

Meanwhile,  Crescentiue  had  not  failed  to  find  a  suitable 
opponent  for  the  German  Pope  in  Philagathus,  an  unscrupulous 
diplomat,  who  had  been  employed  by  Otto  in  an  important 
embassy  to  Constantinople.  On  his  return  from  the  East, 
Philagathus  sold  himself  to  Crescentius,  and  regardless  of  the 
bonds  of  gratitude  and  political  faith,  used  his  newly-acquired 
influence  with  the  eastern  Emperor  against  his  late  patron.  The 
career  of  Philagathus  as  anti-pope  was,  however,  cut  short  by  an 
expedition  of  Otto,  accompanied  by  Gregory,  in  997.  The  ferocity 
which  the  young  Emperor  displayed  in  suppressing  the  revolt, 
and  the  uncharacteristic  barbarity  of  his  treatment  of  Phila- 
gathus, seem  to  indicate  the  first  effects  of  disillusionment  on 
his  character.  The  anti-pope  was  captured  in  an  attempt  to 
escape ;  he  was  mutilated,  condemned  by  a  synod,  degraded,  and 
processed  through  Rome  seated  backwards  on  an  ass ;  finally,  he 
was  thrown  into  a  dungeon,  whence  he  was  never  heard  of  again. 
It  remained  to  subdue  Crescentius,  who  was  holding  out  against 
overwhelming  numbers  in  St.  Angelo.  After  a  heroic  resistance, 
the  German  battering-rams  finally  forced  him  to  capitulate.  He 
was  beheaded  on  the  battlements,  and  his  body  was  afterwards 
exposed  on  Monte  Mario.  His  tragic  end,  and  the  fiction  that 
his  career  was  a- vindication  of  national  liberties,  have  entitled 
Crescentius  to  a  place  among  the  heroes  of  modern  Italy.  In 
reality,  however,  his  rebellion  was  merely  one  of  the  long  series 
of  risings  of  the  civic  aristocracy  which  take  the  place  in  papal 
history  of  the  feudal  revolts  of  England,  France,  or  Germany. 

Otto's  tender  conscience  soon  convicted  him  for  his  ruthless 
treatment  of  the  Roman  rebels,  and  remorse  threw  him  back  on 
the  mystic  side  of  his  nature,  which  was  always  at  war  with  his 
Caesarean  ambitions.  He  spent  the  year  998  on  a  pilgrimage  to 
the  chief  shrines  of  Italy,  and  held  intercourse  with  St.  Nilus, 
the  hermit  of  the  south,  placing  his  Imperial  crown  in  the  hands 
of  the  saint  in  a  characteristic  moment  of  spiritual  enthusiasm. 
Otto's  devotional  exercises  were  suddenly  cut  short  by  the  news 
of  the  death  of  Gregory  V.  The  first  of  the  German  Popes, 
whose  names  stand  for  the  regeneration  of  the  Papacy — in  fact, 
the  first  non-Roman  Pope  for  250  years — the  royal  youth,  who 
had  inaugurated  the  era  of  reform,  was  cut  ofl"  at  the  moment 
when  the  time  was  ripe  for  action. 

In  the  place  of  his  cousin,  Otto  gave  the  Romans  his  tutor 
Gerbert,  a  Frenchman,  a  scientific  genius  and  a  man  of  ex- 
perience, who  took   the  significant  title  of  Silvester  II.     His 


THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  REFORM  99 

intimate  knowledge  of  his  Imperial  pupil  gave  him  an  over- 
whelming advantage  in  all  relations  between  himself  and  Otto, 
and  made  his  pontificate  an  epoch  in  papal-imperial  history. 
He  stimulated  the  young  Emperor's  all-too-vivid  imagination, 
encouraged  his  visionary  flights,  and  played  down  to  his  boyish 
vanity.  Under  his  influence,  the  glamour  of  unreality  fogged 
the  imperial  ideals  of  Otto :  the  yearning  after  Hellenic  Orien- 
talism, inculcated  from  babyhood  by  his  Greek  mother,  now 
dominated  the  other  elements  of  his  complex  but  plastic  nature. 
It  was  under  Silvester's  guidance  that  Otto's  "  Book  of  For- 
mularies "  was  drawn  up,  which  introduced  to  the  Roman  court 
the  elaborate  ceremonial  of  Byzantium.  In  the  place  of  the 
vigorous  Teutonic  simplicity  of  Otto  the  Great,  his  grandson 
surrounded  himself  with  the  ridiculous  ostentation  of  Eastern 
etiquette.  Meanwhile,  the  Pope  held  the  vision  of  Constantine 
ever  before  the  eyes  of  his  pupil.  The  Donation  of  Otto  III., 
though  it  denies  the  claim  of  the  Church  to  temporal  power  as 
a  matter  of  historic  right,  is  lavish  in  its  actual  generosity. 
Silvester  was  opportunist  enough  to  accept  the  gift  without 
pressing  the  point  as  to  the  nature  of  the  claim.  He  received 
the  eight  Romagnol  counties  which  Otto  bestowed  on  him,  and 
flatteringly  persuaded  the  Emperor  to  stay  in  Rome. 

New  allegiance  to  the  Church  came  from  the  surprising 
direction  of  Hungary.  The  King  Stephen  sent  envoys  to  Rome, 
asking  for  investiture  from  Sylvester  in  return  for  spiritual 
obedience.  Otto  associated  himself  with  Silvester  in  acquies- 
cence, hoping  to  receive  the  newly-converted  country  as  a  new 
fief  of  the  Empire.  Stephen,  however,  ignored  the  Emperor's 
interference,  and  thereafter  recognised  the  ecclesiastical  bond 
alone. 

In  spite  of  Silvester's  entreaties.  Otto  left  Italy  in  999,  being 
recalled  to  Germany  by  the  usual  double  motive  of  political 
necessity  and  spiritual  attraction.  The  death  of  the  capable 
regent,  his  aunt  Matilda,  necessitated  his  re-visiting  the  real 
centre  of  his  dominions,  and  the  summons  was  enhanced  by  a 
vow  to  visit  the  grave  of  his  chosen  patron,  St.  Adalbert.  The 
apprehension  of  Silvester  was  too  well  founded.  The  dreaded 
year  1000  was  at  hand,  and  the  panic-stricken  anticipation  of 
the  day  of  Doom  produced  a  general  political  hysteria.  While 
Otto  knelt  in  mystical  rapture  before  the  cave  at  Aachen,  where 
Charles  the  Great  was  buried,  taking  from  the  neck  of  the 
greater  dreamer  a  gold  chain  as  an  insignia  of  empire,  Rome — 
the  desire  both  of  the  dead  hero  and  of  the  living  boy — had 
once  more  raised  the  cry  of  "  No  interference  ". 


100  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

Otto  hurried  back  to  Rome  early  in  1000,  supported  by  a 
German  army,  and  the  city  subsided  at  his  approach.  He  once 
more  took  up  his  abode  in  the  Palace  on  the  Aventine  over- 
looking the  monastery  dedicated  to  St.  Adalbert  of  Prague:  The 
murmur  of  unrest  was  lulled,  but  it  had  not  vanished.  The 
civic  jealousy  of  Rome  for  the  little  town  of  Tivoli  was  aroused 
by  the  clemency  of  Otto,  who  at  the  solicitation  of  Sylvester, 
showed  mercy  in  suppressing  a  revolt  on  the  part  of  the  towns- 
folk against  the  Dux.  The  municipal  rivalry  between  the  world- 
capital  and  the  little  Campagnol  town  was  the  pretext  for  a 
revolution  in  Rome.  Otto's  palace  was  besieged  by  an  infuriated 
mob,  and  the  young  Emperor,  with  an  eloquence  born  of  bitter- 
ness of  soul,  addressed  the  rebels  from  a  tower.  "  Are  you,"  he 
cried,  "my  Romans,  for  whose  sake  I  have  left  my  country  and 
my  relations  ?  Out  of  love  for  you  I  have  shed  the  blood  of  my 
Saxons  and  of  all  Germans,  yea  even  mine  own  .  .  .  You  were 
my  favourite  children ;  for  you  I  have  incurred  the  ill-will  of  all 
the  rest.  And  in  reward  you  desert  your  father.  You  have 
cruelly  slaughtered  my  trusted  friends,  you  have  shut  me 
myself  out  from  among  you ;  though  this  you  could  not  wholly 
do,  since  I  cannot  banish  from  my  heart  those  whom  I  have 
cherished  with  a  father's  love."  (Recorded  by  Tanymar,  who 
heard  it.)  The  sincerity  of  Otto's  disillusion  touched  the  fickle 
hearts  of  his  hearers,  and  the  leaders  of  the  revolt  were  thrown 
half-dead  at  his  feet.  But  the  young  Emperor  never  recovered 
his  confidence  :  he  fled  to  St.  Romuald,  the  Lombard  hermit,  for 
consolation,  and  for  some  time  tried  to  forget  the  overthrow  of 
his  ambition  in  the  cultivation  of  his  soul.  But  Otto  was  too 
restless  for  a  monk.  Rome  attracted  him,  fatally  and  irresistibly, 
to  the  last.  With  feverish  energy  he  harried  the  Campagna, 
beset  by  enemies  on  every  side,  and  finally  died  in  the  arms  of 
Silvester  II.  in  a  castle  outside  the  city.  At  the  age  of  21  he 
died — the  supreme  example  of  royal  self-sacrifice  of  which  the 
history  of  Italy  afi'ords  so  many  instances.  "  The  magic  of  the 
name  of  Rome "  was  never  responsible  for  a  more  pitiable 
tragedy. 

Otto's  ideals  died  with  him.  The  old  Pope  only  outlived  him 
for  a  year,  and  died  with  the  sound  of  failure  ringing  in  his  ears. 
The  last  of  the  national  kings,  Arduin  of  Ivrea,  was  crowned  at 
Pavia,  and  Rome  fell  into  the  hands  of  John  Crescentius,  the 
third  Patricius  of  the  illustrious  line  of  rebels.  For  the  next  six 
years  (1003-9)  John  Crescentius  held  absolute  sway  in  Rome 
and  set  up  two  puppet  Popes,  John  XVII.  and  John  XVIII.,  who 
leave  no  record  of  personality  behind  them.     The  final  overthrow 


THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  EEFOKM  101 

of  the  Crescentines  was  eflfected  by  a  third  would-be  tyrant 
House,  that  of  the  Counts  of  Tusculum.     They  traced  their 
descent   to   the  Theophylacts,   whose   example   they   tried    to 
emulate.     In  1009,  a  member  of  their  House  succeeded  to  the 
Papacy  as  Sergius  IV.  and  during  his  three  years'  pontificate 
John  Crescentius  noticeably  lost  ground.     The  chroniclers  give 
no  details,  and  the  records  are  defective,  but  it  seems  that  on 
the  death  of  John  Crescentius  and  Sergius  IV.  Theophylact  of 
Tusculum  seized  the  Papacy  by  force  from  Gregory,  the  Crescen- 
tine  candidate.     The  Tusculans  had  been  careful  to  preserve  an 
ostentatious  show  of  loyalty  to  Henry  11.  who  had  succeeded 
his    cousin,   Otto    III.,    in   Germany.      Hence,   when    the    two 
Popes   appealed  to  Henry   to   arbitrate,  he  naturally  rejected 
Gregory,  and  pledged  himself  to  recognise  the  Tusculan  Benedict 
VIII.     The  rule  of  the  new  Pope,  though  it  was  founded  on  no 
very  exalted  moral  conception  of  Popedom,  was  vigorous  and 
effective.     He  made  his  brother  Romanus  Senator  of  the  city, 
and  together  with  him  restored  a  measure  of  firm  government, 
which  Rome  had  not  known  for  many  a  generation.     His  first 
object  was  to  restore  the  Papacy  to  the  level  of  an  Italian  power, 
and  with  this  object  in  view  he  immediately  turned  his  atten- 
tion  to  South  Italy  and  the  Saracens. 

Hitherto  the  Popes  had  drawn  their  allies  entirely  from  the 
fickle  south,  and  their  inabihty  to  gain  more  than  a  temporary 
advantage  over  the  elusive  and  ubiquitous  Mohammedan  was 
largely  due  to  the  uncertain  loyalty  of  their  southern  adherents. 
Benedict  VIII.  inaugurated  a  new  era  in  the  Saracen  war  by 
calling  on  the  northern  seaports  to  contribute  their  share  to 
the  defence  of  Italy  and  the  Church.  With  a  fleet  drawn 
from  Pisa  and  Genoa,  who  thus  for  the  first  time  make  their 
appearance  in  the  history  of  the  Church,  the  Papal  forces 
gained  a  complete  and  decisive  maritime  victory  over  the  con- 
quering chief  Mogehid. 

Meanwhile,  the  Greeks  were  renewing  their  attempt  to  win 
back  the  Byzantine  provinces,  and,  against  their  onset,  Benedict 
had  recourse  to  another  innovation,  which  was  fraught  with 
consequences  for  the  future  of  Italy.  As  early  as  1010,  Dattus 
and  Melus  of  Bari  had  employed  the  services  of  a  pilgrim- 
contingent  of  Norman  knights  to  assist  them  in  an  attempt  to 
throw  off  the  Byzantine  yoke— an  attempt  which  ended  dis- 
astrously in  the  defeat  of  Cannae.  They  were  the  fore-runners 
of  a  more  deliberate  migration.  The  survivors  of  Cannae  sold 
their  swords  to  the  highest  bidder,  and  vacillated  between  the 
opposing    forces    with    the    sans-gene   of    the    true    mercenary. 


102  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

When,  in  1022,  Henry  II.  yielded  to  the  Pope's  appeal  and 
came  in  person  to  South  Italy,  the  fiercest  resistance  which  he 
had  to  encounter  came  from  the  new  Greek  fortress  of  Troja, 
which  was  held  against  him  by  a  strong  Norman  contingent 
under  the  command  of  the  Greek  Catapan, 

While  Henry  was  at  work  in  the  south  regaining  his  hold 
on  Byzantine-Lombard  provinces,  Benedict  began  to  turn  his 
attention  to  reform.  His  efforts  to  enforce  celibacy  and  put 
down  simony  were  actuated  by  political  motives  rather  than 
spiritual  zeal.  But  they  were  none  the  less  laudable,  and  it 
was  a  pity  that  they  came  too  late  on  his  political  programme 
for  him  to  bring  them  to  a  successful  issue. 

Benedict  VIII.  was  succeeded  in  1024  by  his  brother, 
Rom  anus,  who  had  for  the  last  ten  years  controlled  the  civil 
government  of  the  city  as  Senator.  The  second  House  of 
Theophylact,  like  their  forerunners  and  ancestors,  brought  about 
their  downfall  by  an  attempt  to  identify  too  closely  the  co- 
ordinate spheres  of  the  Patriciate  and  the  Papacy.  The  Senator 
Romanus  was  not  a  success  as  Pope  John  XIX.  He  knew 
nothing  about  theology,  and  he  shocked  the  cardinals  by  his 
ignorance  of  papal  history.  He  was  genuinely  surprised  at  the 
consternation  which  was  aroused  when  he  nearly  yielded  the 
title  of  Universal  Bishop  to  the  Patriarch  of  Alexandria.  Nor 
was  he  more  effective  on  his  greatest  state  occasion,  the  coro- 
nation of  the  new  Emperor  Conrad  II.  in  1027.  Rome  was  by 
now  accustomed  to  the  idea  of  riot  and  disorder  in  connection 
with  Imperial  coronation,  and  the  Romans  looked  forward  to 
the  street  fight  which  invariably  followed  as  they  would  to  a 
carnival.  But  seldom  was  the  scene  more  blood-stained,  or, 
one  would  have  thought,  less  impressive  than  it  was  under  the 
auspices  of  John  XIX.  A  petty  quarrel  for  precedence  between 
the  Bishops  of  Milan  and  Ravenna  added  the  strife  of  factions 
to  that  of  parties,  and  gave  a  touch  of  the  ridiculous  to  the 
familiar  accompaniments  of  the  scene.  The  presence  of  two 
foreign  kings  was  no  check  on  the  unbridled  passions  of  the 
Romans,  and  we  can  but  wonder  at  the  simple  piety  of  King 
Canute,  who,  in  half-barbaric  wonder,  found  enough  inspiration 
in  the  scene  to  stir  him  to  make  resolutions  for  future  good 
government. 

On  the  death  of  John  XIX.  in  1033  his  relations  committed 
the  crowning  act  of  indiscretion  which  brought  about  the  final 
overthrow  of  the  House  of  Tusculum.  They  raised  his  nephew, 
the  child  Theophylact,  to  the  Papal  throne  as  Benedict  IX. 
Undeterred  by  the  precedent  of  John  XII.,  they  placed  the 


THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  EEFOEM  103 

delicate  weapons  of  tyranny  in  the  hands  of  a  boy  too  young 
to  wield  them.  His  elder  brother,  Gregory,  siezed  the  Patrician 
power  as  Senator  of  Rome,  biit  he  could  not  protect  Benedict 
from  the  consequences  of  his  youth.  The  Romans  would 
tolerate  a  good  deal  in  the  successor  of  St.  Peter,  but  a  child- 
apostle  struck  them  as  unnatural  and  preposterous.  A  con- 
spiracy of  the  captains  in  1035  nearly  cost  the  boy  his  life, 
but  the  panic  created  by  an  eclipse  of  the  sun  enabled  him  to 
escape  to  Conrad  for  protection.  The  Emperor  was  at  Cremona, 
engaged  in  suppressing  a  revolt  of  the  Lombard  "vavasours," 
or  small  landowners.  But  he  needed  the  Pope's  co-operation 
against  Heribert,  the  rebel  Archbishop  of  Milan;  he,  therefore, 
restored  Benedict  to  Rome,  and  in  return  bade  him  excom- 
municate Heribert. 

Supported  by  his  brothers,  Benedict  instituted  a  reign  of 
terror  in  Rome.  The  Lateran  became  the  scene  of  wild  orgies 
and  extravagant  follies.  No  story  told  of  the  Tusculan  brothers 
was  too  execrable  or  too  fantastically  criminal  to  gain  credence 
in  Rome.  The  city  seems  to  have  been  infested  by  a  moral 
epidemic,  but  the  records  are  too  slight  to  enlighten  us  as  to  its 
history.  Benedict  himself  seems  to  have  put  an  end  to  his 
pontifical  career  by  falling  in  love  with  his  cousin,  whose  father, 
Ghardo  de  Saxo,  required  his  would-be  son-in-law  to  resign 
the  Papacy  as  the  condition  of  marriage  with  his  daughter. 
Girardo  had  been  bribed  by  the  Roman  candidate  for  the  Papal 
throne,  who  instantly  assumed  the  tiara  as  Sylvester  III.  But 
Girardo  broke  faith  with  his  nephew,  and  Benedict  IX.,  thwarted 
in  his  amorous  bargain,  resumed  his  office.  But  at  last,  finding 
himself  powerless  against  the  tide  of  hatred  which  his  vices  had 
accumulated,  he  sold  the  Papacy  to  a  third  candidate,  John 
Gratianus,  who  consented  to  make  over  to  Benedict  the  annual 
revenue,  known  as  Peter's  Pence,  derived  from  England. 

Thus,  in  1045,  there  were  said  to  be  three  Popes  in  Rome, 
who  had  all  of  them  seized  the  Holy  Office  by  force,  two  of 
whom  were  morally  unfit  to  be  priests.  The  third,  who 
took  the  title  of  Gregory  VI.,  was  a  man  of  different  calibre. 
He  was  a  person  of  blameless  reputation,  who  had  bought  the 
Papacy  in  order  to  deliver  it  out  of  unworthy  hands.  He  was 
an  enthusiast  for  reform,  and  his  elevation  was  received  with 
acclamation  at  Cluny.  He  was  hailed  with  delight  by  the 
famous  ascetic,  St.  Peter  Damiani,  who  rejoiced  that  "the  Dove 
had  returned  to  the  Ark  ".  Moreover,  there  stood  at  his  side  one 
whose  name  stands  first  among  the  great  makers  of  the  Papacy, 
and  it  is  impossible  to  doubt  the  moral  worthiness  of  the  Pope 


104  A  SHOET  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

from  whom  Hildebrand,  in  affectionate  gratitude,  took  his  title. 
But  Gregory  VI.  could  not  get  rid  of  the  consequences  of  the 
past:  his  reprobate  predecessors  clogged  his  path,  and  his  over- 
sensitive conscience  smote  him  for  the  bold  stroke  of  simony  by 
which  he  had  attained  his  position. 

In  1046,  the  German  King,  Henry  III,,  came  to  Italy,  with 
the  intention  of  putting  an  end  to  the  disorders  of  Rome.  At 
the  Council  of  Sutri,  the  three  Popes  were  one  and  all  set  aside. 
Sylvester  III.  was  summarily  deposed,  and  confined  to  a  monas- 
tery. Gregory  VI.  confessed  himself  guilty  of  simony,  and  with 
quiet  dignity  surrendered  to  the  Council.  His  short  career  was 
misunderstood  by  the  majority  of  his  contemporaries,  who  were 
uncertain  whether  to  regard  him  as  an  apostate  or  a  fool.  It 
required  the  genius  of  a  Hildebrand  to  do  justice  to  his  bold 
anachronism. 

From  Sutri,  Henry  pressed  on  to  Rome,  where  the  formal 
deposition  of  the  three  Popes  was  read  in  St.  Peter's.  Benedict 
IX.  still  held  out  in  the  fortress  of  Tusculum,  but  Rome  had  done 
with  Tusculan  tyranny,  and  recognised  in  Henry  III.  a  deliverer 
worthy  of  their  unanimous  allegiance.  The  general  enthusiasm 
of  his  reception  was  enhanced  by  his  verbal  recognition  of  the 
electoral  rights  of  Rome,  when  Henry  bade  the  Romans  choose 
their  own  Pope.  The  Senators  gracefully  yielded  the  right  to 
the  King,  who  indeed  found  the  task  of  election  no  light  one.  It 
was  difficult  to  find  anyone  worthy  or  willing  to  accept  the  re- 
sponsibility. Finally,  Sindger  of  Bamberg  reluctantly  accepted, 
and  took  the  title  of  Clement  II. 

The  coronation  of  Henry  III.,  which  followed  immediately  on 
the  election  of  the  new  Pope,  ushers  in  the  new  epoch,  which  is 
perhaps  the  most  momentous  in  the  whole  of  papal  history. 
New  principles  and  new  ideas  were  about  to  come  to  birth,  on 
which  was  to  be  founded  the  new  Papacy.  Under  the  Counts  of 
Tusculum  the  Papacy  had  sunk  to  its  lowest  level :  under 
Hildebrand  it  was  to  reach  the  pinnacle  of  power. 


CHAPTER  XII 

THE  PAPACY  UNDER  HILDEBRAND,  a.d.   1046-1085 

Part  I,     Hildebrand 

IN  the  period  which  is  opened  by  the  Council  of  Sutri,  the 
principles  upon  which  reform  depended  were  self-evident, 
but  the  remoter  issues  which  were  bound  up  with  it  were 
hardly  grasped  at  all.  It  was  well  to  realise  the  abuses  of 
simony  and  to  wage  war  against  clerical  immorality ;  but  the 
root  of  the  evil  still  remained  untouched  as  long  as  the  Church 
was  ready  to  submit  to  the  tutelage  of  secular  authority.  As 
long  as  papal  elections  required  Imperial  confirmation,  the  course 
of  reform  lay  at  the  discretion  of  the  Emperor,  while  spiritual 
appointments  remained  in  the  hands  of  the  lay  baronage,  where 
was  the  guarantee  for  a  worthy  priesthood  ?  This  was  an  aspect 
of  the  question  which  only  time  could  reveal ;  one  man  alone 
apprehended  it  at  the  time  of  the  Council  of  Sutri,  and  he — the 
monk  Hildebrand — left  Home  on  the  election  of  Clement  II. 

Honour  is  due  to  the  Emperor  Henry  III.  for  his  lofty  con- 
ception of  the  papal  office,  and  for  his  statesmanlike  zeal  in  the 
cause  of  its  restoration  as  a  moral  force.  Honour,  too,  must  be 
ascribed  to  the  reforming  Popes  who  prepared  the  work  of 
Hildebrand  by  recalling  the  ideal  of  Gregory  I.  If  they  were 
too  ready  in  the  pursuit  of  peace  to  cast  away  the  sword,  too 
intent  upon  inward  restitution  to  turn  their  attention  to  emanci- 
pation from  outward  control,  the  mistake  was  an  easy  one  to 
make.  With  such  an  emperor  as  Henry  III.  to  deal  with,  it  was 
hardly  remarkable  that  the  reforming  Popes  should  accept  his 
intervention  in  a  submissive  spirit.  Indeed,  the  attitude  of 
Hildebrand,  who  remained  unsympathetic  and  critical  in  his 
retreat  at  Cluny,  must  have  looked  like  sullen  pessimism  rather 
than  political  foresight. 

Clement  II.  only  lived  for  a  few  months  as  Pope,  and  his 
sudden  death  in  1047  gave  rise  to  the  suspicion  that  he  had  been 
poisoned.  The  party  of  Benedict  IX.  had  still  to  be  reckoned 
with  ;  the  ex-Pope  returned  to  Rome  on  the  death  of  Clement, 
and  supported  by  Boniface  of  Tuscany — the  chief  Imperial 
vassal  of  Italy — he  became  the  centre  of  an  anti-imperial  revolt. 

105 


106  A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

But  the  alertness  of  Henry  put  an  end  to  Benedict's  prospects. 
He  issued  his  challenge  before  his  opponents  were  ready  to  take 
it  up.  He  sent  Poppo,  Bishop  of  Brixen,  to  Boniface,  and  bade 
the  Margrave  escort  him  as  Pope-designate  to  Rome.  Boniface 
had  no  choice  but  reluctantly  to  comply,  and  abandoning  Bene- 
dict, he  stood  by  at  the  consecration  of  Poppo  as  Damasus  II. 
Hardly  had  the  new  Pope  effected  the  final  expulsion  of 
Benedict  from  Rome,  when  he  himself  met  with  a  sudden  death, 
which  added  to  the  sinister  impressions  created  by  recent  papal 
history. 

To  find  a  successor  was  harder  than  ever.  Eventually  Bruno 
of  Toul,  by  an  impulse  little  short  of  heroic,  consented  to  risk 
his  life  in  the  service  of  St.  Peter,  and  in  1049  assumed  the  title 
of  Leo  IX.  He  took  pains  to  disguise  the  fact  that  he  came  as 
a  stranger  imposed  on  Rome  by  a  foreign  power,  and  no  hint  of 
German  pride  showed  through  his  outward  deference  to  the 
Roman  people.  Accompanied  by  Hildebrand,  who  had  probably 
indicated  the  attitude  which  he  adopted,  Bruno  approached  the 
city  bare-foot,  and  as  a  pilgrim  craved  permission  to  enter.  He 
had  previously  stipulated  to  Henry  that  his  acceptance  of  the 
papal  ofiice  should  be  conditional  on  the  unanimous  election  of 
the  Roman  synod.  His  vindication  of  the  electoral  rights  of 
Rome  went  a  long  way  towards  establishing  his  popularity  in 
the  city,  and  gave  him  at  the  outset  an  advantage  which  other 
German  popes  had  not  been  wise  enough  to  secure.  But  the 
Papacy  to  which  as  Leo  IX.  he  succeeded  was  the  mere  shadow 
of  its  former  self.  Its  temporal  resources  had  been  squandered 
by  the  Tusculans  to  the  point  of  destitution ;  and  the  new  Pope 
even  contemplated  the  prospect  of  selling  his  wardrobe  as  a 
means  of  paying  his  way.  The  Romans,  once  earning  their 
bread  in  the  prosperous  service  of  the  Lateran  court,  now  lived 
precariously  on  the  occasional  alms  of  rich  pilgrims,  who,  like 
Macbeth  of  Scotland  in  1050,  were  moved  to  generosity  by  their 
pitiful  condition.  As  with  material  wealth,  so  with  the  spiritual 
heritage  of  the  new  Pope.  Half  a  century  of  bondage  to  an  ex- 
tortionate and  self-seeking  nobility  had  obliterated  the  work  of 
the  Ottos,  and  effaced  the  memory  of  Gregory  V.  and  Sylvester 
II.  Peter  Damiani's  indictment  of  ecclesiastical  morals,  con- 
tained in  his  "  Gomorrhianus,"  was  condemned,  not  for 
exaggeration,  but  for  its  uncompromising  revelation  of  the  de- 
plorable truth, 

Leo  adopted  the  wisest  course  open  to  him  under  the  circum- 
stances. He  remained  but  a  little  while  in  Rome,  where  he  was 
confronted  with  distress  which  he  was  powerless  to  relieve.     In 


THE  PAPACY  UNDEK  HILDEBEAND  107 

company  with  Hildebrand  he  travelled  about  in  Italy  and  in 
Europe,  restorins;  his  dominions  at  home  and  his  authority 
abroad.  In  1051,  he  made  an  expedition  to  South  Italy,  where 
he  was  adopted  by  the  duchy  of  Benevento  as  its  sovereign  in 
place  of  the  Lombard  Pandulf.  The  value  of  the  acquisition 
was,  however,  impaired  by  the  Normans,  who  harried  it  under 
William  of  the  Long  Arm  from  their  stronghold  in  Apulia.  To 
ward  off  the  hostility  of  the  Normans,  Leo  collected  an  army  of 
German  mercenaries,  and  the  two  forces  met  in  pitched  battle 
at  Civitate  in  1053.  The  Pope,  who  headed  the  campaign  in 
person,  was  completely  defeated,  but  the  Normans  chivalrously 
received  him  into  their  midst,  and  besought  his  forgiveness  for 
having  taken  up  arms  against  him.  Their  generosity  deserved 
a  better  return  than  it  met  with  at  the  hands  of  Leo,  who  had 
no  sooner  pronounced  the  absolution  which  his  enemies  craved 
than  he  conspired  against  them  with  their  persistent  antagonist, 
the  Eastern  Emperor. 

Apart  from  his  military  failure  in  the  South,  Leo  got  much 
discredited  for  the  Norman  campaign,  and  its  disasters  were 
interpreted  as  the  judgment  of  God,  "  since  it  befits  the  priest 
only  to  make  war  with  the  weapons  of  the  spirit,  and  not  to  draw 
the  iron  sword  in  temporal  matters"  (Herman  Contractus). 
Peter  Damiani,  Leo's  personal  friend,  did  not  scruple  to  take 
him  to  task  in  a  bold  letter  of  remonstrance,  in  which  he 
appeals  to  the  example  of  Gregory  in  his  dealings  with  the 
Lombards,  contrasting  it  with  that  of  Leo  to  the  latter's  disad- 
vantage. With  a  fine  disregard  of  the  interests  of  temporal 
power,  the  saint  asks — "  Why  should  armed  hosts  bluster  with 
the  sword  for  temporal  and  transitory  possessions  of  the  Church  ? 
Why  should  Christians  murder  Christians  on  account  of  the 
loss  of  wretched  property?"  The  glamour  of  Peter  Damiani's 
idealism  should  not  blind  us  to  the  real  issues  upon  which  papal 
policy  depended.  The  development  of  the  Papacy  on  spiritual 
lines  seemed  to  lie  within  the  boundary  of  a  charmed  circle. 
Temporal  power  was  its  antithesis,  but  it  was  also  indispensable 
as  a  political  expression  of  the  spiritual  conception.  Such  an 
expression  was  absolutely  necessary  in  an  age  which  invariably 
sought  to  visualise  its  ideals,  and  to  express  its  abstract  beliefs 
in  terms  of  the  concrete  and  the  tangible.  Again  and  again  the 
conscience  of  mediaeval  Christendom  is  outraged  by  the  sight  of 
a  Pope  leading  his  forces  against  a  political  antagonist,  without 
a  suspicion  of  the  logical  inconsistency  which  underlay  these 
scruples. 

More  effective  than  his  diplomacy  in  South  Italy  were  Leo's 


108         A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

wanderings  in  Europe.  In  Germany,  he  supported  the  Emperor 
by  excommunicating  the  rebel,  Godfrey  of  Lotharingia,  who  was 
brought  to  the  feet  of  the  Pope  and  the  Emperor  at  Aachen. 
From  Aachen  he  went  to  Rheims,  where  he  attended  an  impor- 
tant Council,  and  asserted  his  prerogative  by  issuing  decrees  and 
commands  without  reference  to  the  French  King,  who  had  ab- 
sented himself  from  the  Council,  owing  to  his  jealousy  of  papal 
control.  A  Synod  at  Mainz  followed  the  Council  of  Rheims,  and 
Leo  took  the  opportunity  of  making  a  general  survey  of  ecclesi- 
astical affairs  in  Germany  before  returning  to  Rome  in  1050. 
The  value  of  Leo's  European  tour  was  incalculable  to  his  young 
travelling  companion,  Hildebrand,  whose  alert  intelligence  was 
quick  to  receive  impressions,  and  retentive  in  storing  them  up 
for  the  future. 

In  1054,  Leo  IX.  died,  and  was  succeeded  by  Victor  II., 
another  nominee  of  the  German  Emperor.  The  reason  why 
Hildebrand  was  not  elected  has  been  the  subject  of  discussion, 
but  there  were  many  motives  which  may  have  pointed  to  the 
postponement.  Most  probably  he  already  foresaw  the  dimensions 
of  the  struggle  by  which  he  would  be  obliged  to  accomplish  his 
end,  and  the  character  and  might  of  Henry  III.  made  him  an 
unsuitable  antagonist.  Moreover,  the  condition  of  Rome  was 
unfavourable :  the  general  distress  caused  the  populace  as  usual 
to  turn  against"  the  Popes,  and  without  the  loyalty  of  the  city  it 
would  be  hopeless  to  embark  on  the  great  life-and-death  contest 
which  the  genius  of  Hildebrand  had  already  sighted. 

So,  for  nearly  twenty  years  longer,  Hildebrand  remained  the 
power  behind  the  throne,  and  unostentatiously  secured  the  pre- 
liminary steps  which  paved  the  way  for  his  ultimate  triumph. 
In  the  same  year  as  the  coronation  of  Victor,  Henry  III.  made 
an  expedition  to  Italy  with  the  object  of  reasserting  his  hold  on 
the  Tuscan  province,  which  had  fallen  into  the  possession  of  his 
turbulent  vassal,  Godfrey  of  Lotharingia,  through  his  marriage 
with  Beatrice,  the  widow  of  the  late  Margrave.  Two  years  later 
Henry  III.  died,  bequeathing  his  crown  to  his  six-year-old  son, 
Henry  IV.,  whom  he  commended  to  the  care  of  the  Pope.  Pope 
Victor  was  present  at  the  death  of  the  great  Emperor,  and  es- 
corted his  child-heir  to  Aachen,  where  he  crowned  him. 

The  minority  of  Henry  IV.,  so  disastrous  from  the  Imperial 
standpoint,  was  the  opportunity  of  the  Papacy.  To  add  to  the 
advantage,  the  Empress,  who  was  nominally  regent,  was  a  weak 
woman,  and  the  education  of  the  boy-king  was  neglected.  Im- 
perial politics  lay  at  the  discretion  of  the  Pope  and  the  chief 
Imperial  vassal,   Godfrey    of   Tuscany,   whose    interests   were 


THE  PAPACY  UNDER  HILDEBRAND  109 

from  the  first  co-ordinate.    Accordingly,  when,  in  1057  the  death 
of  Victor  caused  a  new  election,  Stephen  IX.,  the  brother  of 
Duke  Godfrey,  was  elected  by  those  who  were  on  the  spot,  and 
his  appointment  was  confirmed  in  the  name  of  the  Emperor. 
Hildebrand,  though  absent  at  the  time,  fully  approved  of  the 
appointment.    Stephen  was  a  man  after  his  own  heart — an  ardent 
reformer,  a  staunch  advocate  of  the  doctrine  of  papal  freedom,  and 
a  fearless  pioneer  of  new  principles.     Unfortunately,  his  pontifi- 
cate only  lasted  for  a  year,  and  his  death,  in  1058,  caused  a  violent 
outbreak  of  hostility  in  Rome  on  the  part  of  the  noble  factions. 
The  Crescentine  and  the  Tusculan  parties  waived  their  tradi- 
tional antagonism,  and  combined  to  elect  the  Bishop  of  Velletri, 
as  anti-pope,  Benedict  X.      Hildebrand,  who  was  still  absent 
from  Rome,  heard  of  it  with  consternation,  and  managed,  for  the 
moment,  to  patch  up  an  alliance  between  the  Empress  Agnes 
and   Godfrey   of  Tuscany,   who   consented   to  lay  aside  their 
mutual  grievances  and  use  their  joint-authority  in  the  support 
of  Hildebrand's  candidate,  Nicholas  II.      But  the   event   had 
proved  to  Hildebrand  that  the  time  was  passed  for  the  real  issue 
to  be  submerged,  and  the  famous  Decree  of  Election  of  the  year 
1059  marks  the  beginning  of  a  new  phase,  in  which  the  Papacy 
sought  no  longer  to  disguise  the  rivalry  underlying  its  dealings 
with   the   Empire.      The   schism   which  followed  the  death  of 
Stephen  IX.  exposed  the  utter  weakness  of  the  papal  position, 
owing  to  the  anomalous  condition  of  the  principle  of  election, 
and  Hildebrand  resolved  that  such  an  opportunity  should  not 
occur  again.     The  Decree  of  1059  raised  the  Cardinal  Bishops  to 
the  status  of  senators  for  the  purpose  of  electing  the  Pope.     The 
old  indefinite  electoral  body— the  "  Clerus,  Ordo,  populusque" 
of  Rome— were  disfranchised,  and  the  right  of  the  Emperor  to 
confirm  the  choice  of  the  Cardinals  was  preserved  in  a  vague 
clause,   "  saving  due  honour  and  reverence  to  Henry,  at  this 
present  time  king  .   .  .  even  as  we  have  granted  this  right  to 
him  and  his  successors,  as  many  as  shall  personally  obtain  it 
from  the  Apostolic  See  ".     The  Synod,  which  passed  the  decree, 
was  the  largest  which  had  ever  met  in  the  Lateran,  but  the 
priests  who  composed  it  were  almost  exclusively  Italian.      It 
was  a  national  as  well  as  a  hierarchical  revolution,  in  which 
every  element  of  anti-German  feeling  had  its  share,  and,  for  the 
moment,  owing  to  the  internal  politics  of  Germany,  it  was  suf- 
fered to  pass  unchallenged. 

There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that  the  Decree  of  Election 
was  largely,  if  not  entirely,  the  work  of  Hildebrand,  and  that 
with  its  passing  the  Hildebrandine  Papacy  came  into  existence. 


110  A  SHOET  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

But  the  legal  foundation  thus  laid  under  Nicholas  II.  called  for 
new  security  for  political  defence.  The  Decree  of  Election  was 
followed  up  by  the  Norman  Alliance,  and  at  Melfi  the  Pope  re- 
ceived the  homage  of  Richard  of  Aversa  and  Robert' Guiscard, 
the  two  most  prominent  leaders  in  Italy  of  the  foremost 
military  nation  of  Europe. 

On  the  death  of  Nicholas  II.  in  1061  the  opposition  to  the 
New  Papacy  broke  out,  and  made  itself  generally  felt  throughout 
Italy  in  three  years'  civil  war,  which  was  the  prelude  to  a  greater 
struggle  still  to  come.  In  this  earlier  contest,  the  antagonism 
raged  round  the  German  Crown  rather  than,  as  later,  against  it. 
In  Germany,  the  Empress-regent  was  a  cipher,  and  the  boy 
Henry  was  under  the  tutelage  of  Archbishop  Hanno,  who  had 
seized  the  Government  by  violence  and  kidnapped  the  King. 
Hanno  was  inclined  to  favour  Hildebrand  and  his  nominee, 
Alexander  II.,  as  against  the  opposition  party  of  the  Italian 
nobility  and  the  anti-pope  Cadalus.  But  the  condition  of  Ger- 
many gave  Hildebrand  no  assurance  for  depending  on  it  as  an 
ally.  Against  Hanno  was  arrayed  the  might  of  the  German 
Counts,  who  were  hostile  both  to  his  government  and  to  his 
principles.  On  the  one  hand,  they  disputed  the  Archbishop's 
despotism,  and,  on  the  other,  they  disliked  his  association  with 
the  champion  of  reform,  for  the  former  implied  hostility  to 
feudal  privileges,  while  the  latter  threatened  the  system  of  lay 
patronage  which  was  the  bulwark  of  their  caste. 

In  Italy  the  distribution  of  parties  was  fairly  even,  and  at 
first  Pope  and  anti-pope  seemed  to  have  equal  chances  of 
success.  To  counter-balance  the  German  Counts,  who  ranged 
themselves  on  the  side  of  Cadalus,  Alexander  relied  for  military 
support  on  the  swords  of  the  Normans,  whose  allegiance  was  as 
yet  untried  in  the  service  of  the  Papacy.  The  leaders  were 
drawn  from  the  hierarchy  by  Alexander,  and  from  the  Roman 
nobility  by  his  rival.  Each  side  had  its  champions  in  the  field 
of  dialectic.  The  caustic  eloquence  of  the  worldling  Bishop 
Benzo  won  for  Cadalus  many  of  his  most  signal  triumphs,  while 
the  sonorous  diatribes  of  Peter  Damiani  placed  all  the  force  of 
ascetic  denunciation  at  the  disposal  of  Alexander  II.  While 
the  military  struggle  raged  in  Rome  with  a  seriousness  of  pur- 
pose which  recalled  the  contest  of  Caesar  and  Pompey,  Benzo 
and  Damiani  hurled  invectives  across  the  literary  arena.  From 
the  Lateran,  which  Alexander  II.  made  his  headquarters,  the 
saint  addresses  the  anti-pope  as  "  the  arrow  from  the  bow  of 
Satan,  the  rod  of  Asher,  the  shipwreck  of  chastity,  the  scum  of 
the  century,  the  food  of  Hell ".     More  efi"ective  are  the  satirical 


THE  PAPACY  UNDEK  HILDEBRAND  111 

replies  of  the  conceited  Bishop  of  Alba,  who  compares  himself 
to  Cicero,  and  complains  that  "  Asinander  (i.e.  Alexander)  fills 
the  world  with  nettles  and  vipers  ".  More  than  once  Alexander 
was  worsted  by  Benzo  in  the  warfare  of  words,  where  the  inferior 
abilities  of  Cadalus  had  failed  to  gain  a  political  advantage. 

The  connecting  link  between  Germany  and  Italy  was  Milan. 
The  Lombard  city  had  long  been  a  centre  of  political  and 
religious  turbulence.  It  was  originally  the  stronghold  of  re- 
action as  opposed  to  reform,  and  all  the  papal  denunciations  of 
clerical  marriage  had  failed  to  shake  the  autocracy  of  the 
secularised  clergy  who  dominated  the  city.  Latterly,  however, 
a  democratic  reform  party  had  arisen,  which,  in  the  name  of 
progress,  had  created  riots,  and  attacked  the  married  clergy  in 
the  streets.  Hildebrand  was,  of  course,  in  sympathy  with  the 
party  of  the  Patarines,  as  the  progressivists  were  called,  and, 
under  his  auspices,  Peter  Damiani  was  sent  to  restore  order. 
The  hierarchy  of  Milan,  who  took  refuge  behind  the  privileges 
which  they  claimed  as  granted  to  them  by  St.  Ambrose,  heard  of 
Peter's  approach  with  the  deepest  concern.  Nor  were  their  fears 
unfounded.  The  "order"  which  the  saint  restored  was  one- 
sided :  the  old  abuses  were  rigorously  stamped  out,  and  the 
Ambrosian  privileges  were  mercilessly  swept  aside.  For  a  time 
at  least  the  Patarines  remained  in  possession.  But  the  contest 
between  Alexander  and  Cadalus  reopened  the  breach.  The 
Ambrosian  party  flocked  to  the  standard  of  Cadalus,  while  the 
Patarines  took  up  the  cause  of  Alexander. 

Meanwhile,  Cadalus  had  managed  to  conquer  the  Leonina, 
but  he  fell  back  before  the  forces  of  Godfrey  of  Tuscany,  who 
had  undertaken  to  arbitrate  between  the  two  parties  by  forcing 
both  to  submit  to  the  decision  of  the  German  Government. 
This  was  in  1062,  and  Henry  was  in  the  hands  of  Hanno  of 
Cologne.  Hanno  had  once  been  the  leader  of  the  Patarines,  so 
that  his  sympathies  were  predisposed  in  favour  of  Alexander. 
Hence  the  German  decision  was  given  in  favour  of  the  reform 
party,  which  resulted  in  the  return  of  Alexander  to  Rome, 
whence  both  he  and  his  rival  had  been  banished  by  the  decree 
of  Godfrey.  But  a  revolution  in  Germany,  which  overthrew 
Hanno  and  restored  the  Empress  to  power,  reflected  itself  in 
Italy  to  the  discomfiture  of  the  Pope  in  the  renewal  of  the  civil 
war.  The  next  year  was  occupied  by  both  parties  in  fruitless 
embassies  to  Henry,  who  was  powerless  in  the  hands  of  the 
ecclesiastical  factions  ;  in  futile  recriminations  on  the  part  of 
Damiani,  and  wasted  grandiloquence  from  the  pen  of  Benzo. 
Finally,  the  restoration  of  Hanno  to  power  in  Germany  brought 


112  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

a  decisive  victory  for  Alexander,  which  was  confirmed  by  the 
Council  of  Mantua  in  1064.  Supported  by  Godfrey  of  Tuscany 
and  the  Norman  knights,  the  New  Papacy  was  secured  in  its 
triumph.  Alexander  and  Cadalus  had  not  fought  out  their  duel 
in  vain,  but  it  was  with  the  strategists  rather  than  the  com- 
batants that  the  real  issues  lay.  To  the  paramount  influence  of 
Hildebrand  throughout  the  contest,  the  testimony  of  his  grudg- 
ing admirer,  Peter  Damiani,  bears  witness.  "  I  respect  the 
Pope,"  he  writes,  "but  I  prostrate  myself  in  adoration  before 
you.  You  make  him  Lord,  but  he  makes  you  God."  The 
impress  of  Hildebrand's  personality  was  never  more  forcibly 
felt  than  by  the  friend  who  had  never  liked  him.  The  two  men, 
akin  in  nothing  but  their  aims,  seemed  bound  together  by  a 
bond  which  their  divergence  of  temperament,  verging  on  the 
point  of  antipathy,  failed  to  break.  The  magnetic  attraction  of 
genius  alone  can  account  for  the  unswerving  loyalty  and  the 
unwilling  deference  which  the  independent  and  masterful 
ascetic  invariably  rendered  to  his  "Holy  Satan" — to  use  his 
own  epithet  for  Hildebrand. 

The  peace  which  had  descended  on  the  Papacy  was  once 
more  disturbed  in  1066  by  Richard  of  Capua,  the  captain 
of  the  Norman  forces,  who  seems  to  have  considered  the 
remuneration  for  his  services  to  the  Papacy  inadequate.  He 
marched  against  Rome,  demanding  the  title  of  Patricius,  and 
threatening  to  extort  it  by  force.  But  Richard  had  miscalculated 
the  extent  of  the  Pope's  dependence  on  him.  Alexander  appealed 
to  his  more  powerful  friend  Godfrey  of  Tuscany,  who  came  with 
his  forces  to  Rome  and  reduced  the  Norman  Duke  to  a  proper 
sense  of  the  relation  of  vassalage. 

With  Godfrey  came  his  step-daughter  Matilda,  the  future 
Duchess  of  Tuscany,  who  was  destined  to  have  so  large  an 
influence  on  the  fortunes  of  Hildebrand.  Even  in  her  girlhood 
Matilda  showed  signs  of  an  individuality  more  strongly  marked 
than  is  characteristic  of  the  women  of  her  period.  She  was 
courageous,  proud,  and  indomitable,  and  her  susceptibility  to 
Hildebrand's  influence  was  based  on  all  that  was  strongest  in  her 
nature.  She  was  impressionable  without  losing  her  independence 
of  judgment :  she  grasped  the  full  meaning  of  the  Hildebrandine 
ideal,  saw  without  flinching  the  goal  to  which  it  led,  and  laboured 
steadily  for  its  fulfilment.  The  friendship  between  Matilda  and 
Hildebrand  which  began  at  this  time  was  sealed  by  experience 
till  it  became  one  of  the  most  momentous  and  honourable  of 
such  relationships  which  history  has  ever  recorded.  Without 
the  reliable  support  of  the  great  Duchess,  as  she  afterwards 


THE  PAPACY  UNDER  HILDEBRAND  113 

became,  the  greatest  drama  of  papal  history  could  never  have 
been  played. 

In  the  same  year,  the  character  of  the  young  German  King 
began  to  make  itself  felt  in  his  relationship  to  the  Pope. 
Henry  IV.  will  always  remain  something  of  an  enigma  to  history. 
His  impulsiveness,  his  general  ineffectiveness,  intermingled  with 
occasional  spurts  of  energy — his  power  of  recovering  from 
disaster  which  gives  the  lie  to  the  contemporary  belief  in  his 
incompetence,  form  a  picture  of  which  it  is  hard  to  grasp  the 
main  outline.  In  1066  he  was  married  to  the  beautiful  and 
deserving  Bertha  of  Turin.  But  he  took  a  capricious  dislike  to 
his  bride  and  threatened  to  divorce  her,  and  with  this  end  in 
view  he  intrigued  with  the  Archbishop  of  Mainz.  He  was, 
however,  thwarted  by  Alexander,  who  sent  Peter  Damiani  as 
legate  to  threaten  the  King  with  extreme  spiritual  penalties  if 
he  proceeded  with  the  divorce.  Urged  by  the  Bishops,  who 
dared  not  resist  the  papal  commands,  Henry  submitted  to  Peter 
Damiani,  received  his  Queen  with  honour,  and  became  devoted 
to  her  in  a  short  time,  his  domestic  felicity  relieving  the  tragedy 
of  his  later  career.  The  submission  of  the  King  was  followed  by 
the  humiliation  of  the  German  bishops,  who  had  formed  an 
aristocratic  ring  round  the  King  during  his  minority,  and  were 
unwilling  to  relinquish  their  absolutism  now  that  he  had  out- 
grown the  leading-strings.  A  summons  to  answer  a  charge  of 
simony  brought  the  three  leaders  of  the  German  hierarchy, 
among  them  the  autocrat  Hanno,  to  Rome,  where  they  were 
formally  condemned  by  the  Easter  Synod  of  1070.  The  three 
Bishops  returned  to  Germany  completely  humiliated  by  their 
reception  in  Rome ;  Hanno  of  Cologne  became  a  servitor  in  his 
own  religious  house,  Siegfried  of  Mainz  retired  to  Cluny,  and 
Herman  of  Bamberg  set  to  work  to  reform  his  episcopate  on 
monastic  lines. 

Meanwhile,  the  work  of  Hildebrand  was  already  changing 
the  face  of  Italy.  Fresh  disputes  in  Milan  had  brought  new  and 
more  vital  issues  to  the  surface  in  connection  with  the  con- 
secration of  the  Archbishop.  In  1068,  Archbishop  Guido,  the 
partisan  of  Cadalus,  retired,  and  sent  the  deacon  Godfrey,  as  a 
candidate  for  the  Archbishopric,  to  King  Hemy.  But  the  clergy 
of  Milan  rose  in  a  body  against  this  infringement  of  the  privilege 
of  St.  Ambrose :  they  claimed  the  right  to  elect  their  own 
Archbishop,  and  forced  Guido  to  apologise  and  resume  office  in 
his  own  person.  Four  years  later,  death  released  Guido  from 
his  burden,  and  reopened  the  question  of  the  election.  This 
time  the  dispute  turned  on  the  right  of  ratification,  and  not  as 

8 


114    A  SHOKT  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

before  on  the  power  of  election,  which  was  tacitly  conceded  to 
the  Cathedral  body.  The  question  was  whether  the  Pope  or  the 
German  King  had  the  right  to  confirm  the  appointment 
submitted  to  them  by  the  Canons  of  Milan.  Erlembald,  the 
leader  of  the  Patarines,  declared  for  the  Pope,  but  the  Imperial 
party  refused  to  nominate  his  candidate  Atto,  and  forced  the 
latter  to  repudiate  his  election.  But  the  death  of  the  anti-pope 
Cadalus  at  this  juncture  secured  the  ultimate  triumph  of  the 
Hildebrandine  party.  Thanks  to  the  efibrts  of  Erlembald,  Atto 
was  confirmed  in  the  Archbishopric,  and,  for  the  time  at  least, 
the  German  King  had  lost  his  foothold  in  the  Lombard  capital. 

Such  was  the  situation  in  the  North.  In  the  South,  con- 
ditions were  even  more  favourable  to  the  high  papal  party.  With 
the  exception  of  Richard  of  Aversa,  the  Normans  vied  with 
one  another  in  zeal  for  the  championship  of  the  Holy  See. 
As  a  race,  these  roving  warriors  seem  to  have  been  endowed 
with  a  peculiarly  religious  temperament.  They  had  fallen  on 
their  knees  and  craved  absolution  from  their  pontifical  captive 
after  the  battle  of  Civitate.  They  had  undertaken  the  conquest 
of  Sicily  as  a  religious  war,  and  dedicated  their  arms  to  the 
service  of  St.  Peter.  The  great  William  had  set  out  for  the 
conquest  of  England  under  the  papal  banner,  for  which  he  had 
petitioned  with  a  gratifying  humility.  The  adoption  of  the 
cause  of  William  the  Conqueror  was  the  individual  efi'ort  of 
Hildebrand,  and  nothing  is  more  characteristic  of  his  infallible 
intuition  than  the  persistency  with  which  he  urged  the  identi- 
fication of  the  papal  interests  with  the  Norman  conquest  of 
England.  He  was  statesman  enough  to  see  beyond  the  piety  of 
the  English  kings,  when  they  came  as  pilgrims  to  the  confession 
of  St.  Peter;  he  read  between  the  lines  of  the  ecclesiastical 
reports,  and  detected  the  insular  spirit  which  animated  Anglo- 
Catholicism  from  the  time  of  Augustine;  he  recognised  the 
geographical  conditions  by  which  nature  fostered  that  spirit,  and 
he  welcomed  as  an  antidote  the  project  which  would  in  all 
probability  draw  the  island  nation  nearer  to  Europe,  and  so 
bring  it  into  closer  touch  with  Rome. 

Part  II.     Gregory  VII. 

In  twenty  years  of  silent  toil  and  unobtrusive  draughtsman- 
ship, Hildebrand  had  laid  the  foundations  of  his  wonderful 
creation.  The  death  of  Alexander  II.  in  1073  called  him  to 
direct  its  completion  in  the  eyes  of  the  world.  "  Let  Hildebrand 
be  Pope  !  "  was  the  cry  of  the  Romans,  which  was  echoed  to  the 


THE  PAPACY  UNDER  HILDEBRAND  115 

limits  of  Christendom.  And  indeed  the  time  was  fully  ripe. 
The  fabric  was  all  prepared,  and  none  but  the  designer  himself 
could  supply  the  few  master-strokes  which  remained  to  be 
efifected.  His  objects  were  so  clearly  defined  that  they  need  no 
classification,  but  they  may  be  summarised  under  two  aspects. 
On  the  one  hand,  there  is  his  positive  end — the  reorganisation 
of  the  Church  by  means  of  the  papal  supremacy — and  on  the 
other  hand,  the  negative  aspect,  which  is  the  corollary  of  the 
former — the  liberation  of  the  Church  from  lay  control  in  all  the 
branches  of  its  government. 

Hildebrand  was  consecrated  on  June  29,  1073,  taking  his 
title  from  his  first  patron,  Gregory  VI.,  in  recognition  of  services 
to  the  Papacy  which  had  been  singularly  unrequited.  His 
election  was  not  confirmed  or  ratified  by  the  German  King,  who 
claimed  no  voice  in  the  matter  but  acquiesced  in  its  accomplish- 
ment. In  a  letter  to  Godfrey  II.  of  Tuscany,  the  husband  of  the 
Duchess  Matilda,  Gregory  VII.  defines  the  attitude  which  he  in- 
tended to  adopt  towards  Henry  IV.  They  were  to  be  as  father 
and  son.  but  if  the  King  were  to  fail  in  dutiful  submission,  then 
"we  will  not,  God  helping  us,  incur  the  curse  pronounced  on 
him  '  who  keepeth  back  his  sword  from  blood ' ".  The  words 
contained  a  challenge,  but  if  they  reached  the  King  they  fell  on 
deaf  ears,  for  Henry  was  absorbed  in  a  life  and  death  struggle 
with  his  Saxon  vassals. 

Gregory's  first  Council,  in  1074,  sounded  the  keynote  of  his 
pontificate  in  spiritual  afi'airs,  and  prepared  the  way  for  the 
formation  of  parties.  The  decrees  against  simony  and  clerical 
marriage  were  re-issued  with  renewed  force,  and  extreme  penal- 
ties attached  to  them.  Opposition  broke  out  simultaneously  in 
all  the  centres  of  Christendom  where  the  decrees  were  pro- 
mulgated. In  Rome  itself,  where  moral  conditions  were  at 
their  worst,  the  clergy  upon  whom  the  penalties  fell  became  the 
nucleus  of  opposition.  The  sixty  "  Mansionarii,"  or  lay-deputies, 
who  impersonated  the  Cardinals  of  St.  Peter's,  were  expelled 
without  mercy,  and  the  Cathedral  was  no  longer  the  scene  of 
nocturnal  orgies,  which  had  outraged  the  feelings  of  so  many 
pious  pilgrims  to  the  Apostles'  grave.  As  at  Milan  the  Patarines 
had  forced  the  higher  clergy  into  opposition  to  the  New  Papacy, 
so  in  Rome  the  execution  of  the  decrees  threw  a  large  body  of 
clerical  offenders  on  to  the  anti-Gregorian  side.  At  Passau, 
Bishop  Altmann  was  nearly  murdered  in  an  attempt  to  enforce 
the  edict.  In  Paris,  a  Synod  returned  to  Gregory  the  answer 
that,  "what  he  wanted  was  inacceptable  and  contrary  to  reason," 
and  at  Cambrai,  the  monks  unanimously  declared  themselves  in 


116  A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

favour  of  "  the  usages  (i.e.  concubinage)  which  have  been  wisely 
established  by  the  indulgence  of  our  fathers ".  Henry  IV. 
meanwhile  maintained  his  outward  neutrality  and  adopted  an 
attitude  of  hostile  inaction,  dictated  by  the  political  crisis  with 
which  he  was  faced  in  Germany. 

In  the  face  of  an  opposition  so  general  and  so  concerted,  it 
was  necessary  to  bind  the  Normans  still  more  closely  to  the 
Holy  See.  With  this  object  in  view  Gregory  visited  South  Italy 
in  1074,  and  endeavoured  unsuccessfully  to  extort  an  oath  of 
allegiance  from  Robert  Guiscard.  The  Norman  settlement  was 
divided  against  itself,  and  Robert  was  jealous  of  Gregory's 
friendship  with  his  rivals,  Richard  of  Capua  and  Gisulf  of 
Salerno.  The  oath  which  Robert  refused  and  which  Richard  of 
Capua  and  Landulf  of  Benevento  accepted,  gave  the  primary 
allegiance  of  the  Normans  to  the  Papacy,  and  made  their  loyalty 
to  Henry  conditional  on  the  Papal  pleasure.  Thus,  secure  in 
the  renewed  support  of  the  Normans,  Gregory  returned  to  Rome, 
where  he  received  a  letter  of  profound  self-abasement  and  peni- 
tent submission  from  Henry — a  frame  of  mind  dictated  by  his 
defeat  at  the  hands  of  the  Saxons. 

Events  seemed  to  point  to  a  forward  policy.  Europe  was  pre- 
pared for  something  startling,  and  in  1075,  Gregory's  second 
Council  launched  his  ultimatum  at  his  enemies.  A  decree  was 
passed  which  in "  uncompromising  language  forbade  the  lay  in- 
vestiture of  the  clergy  in  all  its  forms  and  throughout  all  the 
ranks  of  the  hierarchy.  The  Investiture  Edict  was  a  momentous 
innovation,  and  its  direct  results  were  fifty  years  of  war  and 
centuries  of  controversy.  And  yet  it  was  in  reality  the  climax 
towards  which  events  had  been  tending  ever  since  the  year  800. 
For  nearly  300  years,  spiritual  and  temporal  principles  had  been 
at  war  in  the  political  arena;  all  the  failures  of  reform — the 
dark  phases  of  secular  tyranny  in  papal  history,  and  the  darker 
moments  of  ecclesiastical  degradation — were  traceable  to  the 
root  antagonism  which  underlay  spiritual  and  temporal  interests, 
and  the  inability  of  contemporaries  to  distinguish  between  them. 
The  insight  of  Hildebrand  was  required  to  formulate  the  dis- 
tinction, and  his  unerring  political  genius  instantly  recognised 
that  it  was  a  question  of  war  to  the  hilt.  If  the  Church  was  to 
be  pure,  the  Church  must  be  free,  and  the  freedom  of  the  Church 
meant  freedom  from  lay  control.  Such  was  the  logic  of  Hilde- 
brand, and  so  far  he  was  justified.  But  he  went  further,  and 
aimed  at  maintaining  the  temporal  power  of  the  Church  intact, 
while  at  the  same  time  he  waged  war  against  its  natural  con- 
sequence, the  principle  of  secularism.    It  was  here  that  his  logic 


THE  PAPACY  UNDER  HILDEBRAND  117 

broke  down.  The  metaphor  of  Peter  Damiani,  comparing  the 
relation  of  the  temporal  to  the  spiritual  power  to  that  of  the 
body  to  the  bouI,  expresses  only  one  aspect  of  the  Hildebrandine 
ideal ;  the  force  of  the  simile  was  destroyed  when  it  was  applied 
to  a  materialised  conception  of  spirituality. 

It  was  not,  however,  the  theoretical  aspect  of  the  question 
which  roused  the  militant  spirit  of  Europe.     Gregory's  contem- 
poraries saw  in  the  Investiture  Edict  an  unwarrantable  encroach- 
ment on  the  part  of  the  Papacy,  which  called  for  immediate 
resistance.     At  the  head  of  the  opposition  stood  the  German 
King,  and  Henry  was  temporarily  in  a  strong  position,  owing  to 
a  series  of  military  successes  in  Saxony.     The  fall  of  Erlenbald 
and  the  defeat  of  the  Patarines  gave  him  the  support  of  Milan, 
which   received   a   new   anti-papal  Archbishop  in  the  German 
Tedald.     But  the  first  blow  was  struck  in  Rome  itself,  by  the 
rebel  Cencius — half  brigand  and  half  noble,  who  identified  the 
losing  cause  of  anti-reform  with  the  spirit  of  lawless  aristocracy, 
and  thus  sealed  its  doom.     On  Christmas  Day,  1075,  Gregory 
was   celebrating   Mass   in   St.    Maria  Maggiore.     Cencius,  sup- 
ported by  kindred  spirits  of  his  own  class,  rushed  the  building 
with  drawn  sword,  seized  the  Pope  by  the  hair,  wounded  him, 
and   carried   him   off  to  his  fortress  on  the  Campagna.     Here 
Gregory  was  ill-treated  by  Cencius  and  insulted  by  his  sisters, 
till  he  was  finally  rescued  by  the  Roman  people,  who  were  now 
and  always  his  warmest  allies  in  his  own  territories.     The  dig- 
nity and  courage  of  the  Pope  throughout  the  episode  contrast 
very  favourably  with  the  blustering  brutality  of  his  captors.     He 
submitted  with   Spartan   endurance  to  the  indignities  heaped 
upon  him,  and  answered  the  recriminations  of  the  virago  women 
with  stern  silence.     Instead  of  begging  for  release,  he  dictated 
his  own  terms  to  Cencius,  promising  to  forgive  him  if  after  a 
pilgrimage  the  rebel  returned  penitent  to  his  feet — a  promise 
which  was  faithfully  kept  by  Gregory,  while  Cencius  rewarded 
his  clemency  by  ravaging  his  lands  and  supporting  his  enemies. 
At   his   release   the   Pope   was  carried  back  in  triumph  to  St. 
Maria,  where  he  finished  the  Mass  which  had  been  interrupted 
the   day   before.     The   conspiracy  of  Cencius  hastened  on  the 
final   struggle,   and   lent   new   bitterness   to   Gregory's    mental 
attitude   towards   his  enemies.     Whether  or  no  the  enterprise 
was  inspired  or  stimulated  by  Henry  IV.  is  uncertain  ;  it  was, 
however,   the   immediate  prelude  of  the   great  personal   duel 
which  forms  the  climax  of  the  papal-imperial  struggle. 

Henry  IV.  now  threw  off  the  last  semblance  of  caution.     Hig 
victory  of  Hohenburg  had  revived  his  eelf-confidence,  and  the 


118  A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

reception  which  was  generally  accorded  to  the  Investiture  Edict 
led  him  to  under-estimate  Gregory's  position  in  Europe.  Henry 
consequently  recalled  the  counsellors  whom  Gregory  had  in- 
duced him  to  banish,  he  sold  benefices,  confirmed  Tedald  in  the 
Archbishopric  of  Milan,  and  generally  broke  all  the  promises 
which  he  had  made  in  his  first  letter  to  the  Pope  in  1073. 
Gregory  would  let  nothing  pass  :  he  wrote  a  private  letter 
demanding  the  King's  instant  repentance,  to  which  the  testimony 
of  German  Bishops  was  required.  He  compared  Henry  to  Saul, 
ofi'ering  him  excommunication  as  the  only  alternative  to  sub- 
mission. He  dwelt  on  the  scandals  of  the  King's  private  life, 
founding  his  accusations  on  vague  rumours  which  stung  Henry 
at  a  vulnerable  point.  Henry  in  lury  expelled  the  legates  from 
his  court,  and  summoned  a  council  at  Worms,  which,  under  the 
presidency  of  Siegfried  of  Mainz,  pronounced  the  deposition  of 
the  Pope.  Only  the  madness  of  blind  rage  could  account  for  so 
inpolitic  and  indefensible  a  retaliation.  The  tone  of  the  King's 
letter  is  the  best  clue  to  his  amazing  indiscretion. 

"  Henry,  not  by  usurpation  but  by  God's  holy  will  King,  to 
Hildebrand,  not  Pope,  but  false  monk. 

"  This  salutation  hast  thou  deserved,  upraiser  of  strife,  thou 
who  art  cursed  instead  of  blessed  by  every  order  in  the  Church. 
Let  me  be  brief:  the  Archbishops,  Bishops,  and  Priests  thou 
hast  trodden  under  thy  feet  as  slaves  devoid  of  will.  Thou 
boldest  them  all  as  ignorant,  thyself  alone  as  wise.  We  suffer 
all  from  reverence  for  the  seat  of  the  Apostle ;  thou  heldest 
reverence  for  fear,  thou  resistedst  the  royal  power  itself  which 
God  has  conferred  on  us,  and  threatenedst  to  depose  us,  as  if  rule 
and  empire  stood  not  in  God's  hands  but  in  thine.  Christ  has 
called  us  to  the  empire,  but  not  thee  to  the  Papacy.  Thou  ac- 
quiredst  it  by  craft  and  fraud ;  in  scorn  of  thy  monastic  cowl 
thou  obtainedst  favour  by  gold,  by  favour  arms,  by  arms  the 
throne  of  peace,  from  which  thou  hast  destroyed  peace,  for  thou 
armedst  the  subjects  against  the  powers  that  be  and  preachest 
treason  against  the  Bishops  called  by  God,  to  depose  and  con- 
demn whom  thou  even  givest  power  to  the  laity.  Wilt  thou 
depose  me,  a  blameless  king,  who  am  judged  by  God  alone, 
since  the  Bishops  left  judgment  over  even  an  Apostate  Julian 
to  God.  Does  not  Peter,  the  true  Pope,  say  :  '  Fear  God,  honour 
the  King '  ?  Because  thou  fearest  not  God,  thou  knowest  not  me, 
whom  he  has  appointed.  The  curse  of  St.  Paul  touches  thee, 
the  judgment  of  all  our  Bishops  condemns  thee,  and  says  to 
thee  :   '  Descend  from   the  Apostolic  throne  which  thou  hast 


THE  PAPACY  UNDEK  HILDEBKAND  119 

usurped,  that  another  may  take  it,  who  will  not  do  violence  to 
religion  but  teach  the  true  doctrine  of  Peter'.  I,  Henry,  by 
God's  grace  King,  with  all  our  Bishops  call  on  thee  : — Descend, 
descenei ! " 

The  deposition  had  not  even  the  semblance  of  legality  to 
give  it  force,  but  it  was  enthusiastically  ratified  on  its  way  to 
Rome  by  the  Bishops  of  North  Italy.  Roland,  a  deacon  of 
Parma,  presented  it  to  Gregory  in  the  midst  of  the  Lateran 
Council  on  February  22.  The  Prefect  of  the  City  drew  his  sword 
against  the  intrepid  envoy,  who  was,  however,  protected  from 
injury  by  the  interference  of  Gregory  himself.  The  Council 
rose  as  one  man  to  defend  the  Pope,  and  even  Henry's  own 
mother,  the  dowager-Empress  Agnes,  attempted  no  protest  in 
favour  of  her  son.  To  Hildebrand  it  was  the  crucial  moment 
of  his  career,  and  the  profound  religiousness  underlying  his 
energy  came  to  the  surface  in  his  counter-reply. 

"  Holy  Peter,  chief  of  the  Apostles,  incline  I  pray  thee  thine 
ear  to  me,  hear  me,  thy  servant,  whom  thou  hast  nourished 
from  childhood,  and  hast  saved  to  this  day  out  of  the  hand  of 
the  enemies  who  have  hated  and  still  hate  me  because  I  serve 
thee  in  truth.  Thou  art  my  witness  .  .  .  that  I  counted  it  not 
robbery  to  ascend  to  thy  chair,  and  that  rather  would  I  end 
my  days  in  foreign  lands  than  snatch  at  thy  seat  by  worldly  in- 
trigues. Of  thy  free  grace,  not  because  of  my  works,  did  it  please 
thee  that  the  Christian  people  entrusted  to  my  care  should  obey 
me  as  thy  delegate,  and  for  thy  sake  has  the  power  been  granted 
me  to  bind  and  to  loose  in  heaven  and  on  earth.  Being  full 
of  this  confidence  for  the  honour  and  protection  of  thy  Church, 
in  the  name  of  Almighty  God,  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy 
Ghost,  by  virtue  of  thy  authority,  I  deprive  King  Henry,  son  of  the 
Emperor  Henry,  who  with  unexampled  pride  has  risen  against 
thy  Church,  of  the  government  of  the  whole  Empire  of  Germany 
and  Italy,  I  release  all  Christians  from  the  oath  which  they  have 
made,  or  yet  may  make  to  him,  and  hereby  forbid  any  man  to 
serve  him  as  king.  For  it  is  meet  that  whosoever  strives  to 
diminish  the  honour  of  thy  Chiirch  should  himself  lose  the 
honour  which  he  seems  to  have.  And  because  he  scorns  to 
obey  like  a  Christian,  and  returns  not  to  the  Lord,  whom  he 
has  renounced  by  fellowship  with  the  excommunicated,  by 
divers  evil  deeds,  by  despising  my  admonitions  administered 
for  his  salvation,  and  by  separating  himself  from  the  Church,  I 
do  bind  him  in  thy  name  with  the  bonds  of  anathema,  that  the 
nations   may  know  and  confess  that  thou  art  Peter,  and  that 


120    A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

upon  this  rock  the  Son  of  the  living  God  has  built  His  Church, 
and  the  gates  of  Hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it."  ^ 

The  words  sound  across  the  ages  with  the  vibration  which 
mere  eloquence  has  never  created.  The  splendour  of  the  Hilde- 
brandine  ideal,  the  dramatic  intensity  of  the  crisis,  even  the 
outstanding  wonder  of  the  personality  of  the  Pope — these  are 
insufficient  to  account  for  the  effect  of  Gregory's  anathema.  The 
source  of  its  unique  significance  in  history,  the  secret  of  its 
immediate  result,  the  hidden  force  which  stunned  his  enemies 
and  thrilled  his  adherents,  was  the  inspiration  of  the  Rock. 
Powerless  against  the  spiritual  challenge,  Henry  waited  for  the 
weakness  of  his  position  to  be  revealed.  He  looked  round  for  his 
allies,  and  found  them  in  the  enemy's  camp.  Two-thirds  of 
Germany  were  his  feudal  enemies,  personal  rivals  such  as  Welf 
of  Bavaria,  Rudolf  of  Swabia  and  Berthold  of  Carinthia,  who  were 
in  close  intrigue  with  the  legates.  The  Bishops  who  had  signed 
the  unfortunate  edict  of  deposition  against  Gregory  now  hastened 
to  make  their  submission,  undertaking  to  hold  no  dealings  with 
the  excommunicated  King.  Henry  called  diets  at  Worms  and  at 
Mainz,  but  the  results  were  fatal  to  his  ebbing  courage.  His 
enemies  meanwhile  assembled  themselves  at  Tribur  in  the 
autumn  of  1076.  Henry,  from  Oppenheim,  tried  to  treat  with  the 
presiding  princes,  but  the  Council  unanimously  turned  a  deaf 
ear,  and  demanded  his  instant  reconciliation  with  the  Pope. 
Finally,  the  King's  deposition  was  pronounced,  and  Henry  was 
obliged  to  retire  to  Speyer  as  a  private  individual,  to  await  the 
coming  of  his  chief  adversary,  who  was  to  pass  judgment  on  him 
at  a  proposed  Council  to  be  held  at  Augsburg  in  February. 

The  situation  was  desperate  enough,  and  to  add  to  it  the 
King's  spirit  was  broken.  The  isolation  of  his  position  became 
intolerable,  and  secretly,  in  mid-winter,  he  set  out  across  the 
Mont  Cenis,  accompanied  by  his  wife  and  child,  and  the  few 
faithful  courtiers  who  clung  to  him  in  pity.  In  Italy,  the  tide 
had  turned  against  the  Pope,  and  had  the  King  come  in  a  different 
guise  he  might  have  counted  on  the  support  of  the  North,  But 
the  fugitive  pilgrim  stirred  the  contempt  of  the  proud  Lombards, 
who  turned  their  backs  as  he  passed  on  his  way  to  Canossa. 
Here  Gregory  had  fixed  his  headquarters  as  the  guest  of  the  loyal 
Matilda,  whose  lands  and  forces  were  now  as  always  at  his  dis- 
posal. For  three  days  the  German  king  waited  in  the  outer 
Court  craving  with  tears  and  prayers  the  privilege  of  humbling 

1  From  the  translation  given  by  G.  Kruger  in  "  The  Papacy  :  its  Idea  and  Ex- 
ponents".    (Fisher  Un win,) 


THE  PAPACY  UNDER  HILDEBRAND  121 

himself  before  the  Pope.  Daily  the  German  bishops  passed  in 
before  him  to  make  their  submission,  scornfully  pitying  the  royal 
suppliant  as  he  knelt  in  the  snow.  At  last  the  heart  of  Matilda 
was  moved  to  compassion  and  her  pleading  won  for  Henry  the 
privilege  of  a  penitent.  On  January  28  Gregory  absolved  him, 
and  received  his  crown  into  his  hands  until  the  Council  should 
have  acquitted  him,  and  he  should  have  sworn  obedience  to  the 
papal  will  as  the  condition  for  again  receiving  it.  The  closing 
scene  of  the  drama  is  the  unconfirmed  but  probably  authentic 
account  of  the  Mass  at  Canossa.  Gregory  is  reported  to  have 
solemnly  cleared  himself  by  oath,  with  the  Host  in  his  hand, 
from  all  the  charges  brought  against  him  by  his  enemies.  He 
then  challenged  the  penitent  King  to  follow  his  example,  but 
Henry  is  said  to  have  shrunk  in  guilt  from  the  terrible  test  and 
confessed  himself  afraid. 

The  victory  of  Canossa  bafiles  analysis.  It  raises  Hildebrand 
above  the  level  of  other  heroes  of  action;  Caesar  and  Napoleon 
pale  before  him  in  the  glow  which  encircles  the  battle  of  ideas, 
for  whereas  they  fought  their  way  with  their  legions  at  their  back, 
Hildebrand  strove  single-handed  with  the  weapons  of  the  spirit. 
Caesar's  campaigns  can  be  compared  with  other  mOitary  successes, 
and  the  battle  of  Lodi  is  not  without  a  parallel  outside  the  career 
of  Napoleon ;  but  Canossa  stands  alone. 

Hildebrand's  triumph  was  too  complete,  and  the  reaction  was 
inevitable.  As  Henry  retraced  his  steps,  the  disgust  which  his 
craven  submission  had  aroused  vented  itself  in  anger  against  the 
Pope.  The  German  princes  had  required  the  King  to  reconcile 
himself  with  Gregory,  but  they  had  not  bargained  for  this.  They 
refused  to  identify  themselves  with  the  humiliating  treaty  of 
Canossa,  and  disowning  the  King  who  had  lost  in  their  eyes  his 
self-respect,  they  elected  Rudolf  of  Swabia  to  succeed  him.  Henry 
was  thus  finally  stung  beyond  endurance,  and  his  moral  recovery 
was  signalised  in  his  alliance  with  the  Lombards.  Gregory,  on 
his  side,  collected  his  allies.  Besides  the  forces  of  Matilda,  he 
thought  he  co\iId  count  on  the  support  of  the  Normans,  and  the 
impression  was  confirmed  by  the  tardy  homage  of  Robert  Guis- 
card,  which  was  now  rendered  to  him.  Thus  encouraged,  Gregory 
tendered  the  same  oath  to  William  of  England,  but  he  was  met 
with  a  flat  refusal  from  the  Conqueror,  who  had  already  imbibed 
the  independent  spirit  of  his  adopted  kingdom.  It  was  in  1080 
that  the  first  symptom  of  decline  in  the  papal  fortunes  made 
itself  felt.  Gregory  realised  that  he  could  not  count  on  Italy : 
the  Normans,  absorbed  in  their  own  concerns,  showed  signs  of 
cooling  ofi',   and  it  became   necessary   to  look  once    more   to 


122    A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

Germany.  Up  to  this  point,  Gregory  had  treated  both  the  parties 
in  Germany  as  his  antagonists.  Henry  had  openly  declared 
hostihty,  and  banished  the  papal  legates.  The  princes,  on  the 
other  hand,  had  broken  the  papal  treaty  by  electing  Rudolf  of 
Swabia  as  king.  The  Pope,  however,  decided  to  overlook  the  lesser 
offence  for  the  more  effective  punishment  of  the  greater,  and  con- 
sequently agreed  to  recognise  Rudolf  and  ally  himself  with  the 
German  princes.  He  cursed  Henry's  arms,  reiterating  the  poignant 
phrases  of  the  earlier  excommunication  ;  but  repetition  weakened 
the  effect  of  the  spiritual  onset.  Henry  in  reply  created  as 
anti-pope  Wilbert  of  Ravenna — young,  impetuous  and  ambitious 
— and  with  him  prepared  to  march  against  Rome.  At  the  same 
moment,  Rudolf  of  Swabia  died,  and  his  successor  Hermann  of 
Luxemburg,  was  not  influential  enough  to  hold  the  interests  of 
the  opposition  united. 

The  four  years'  campaign  forms  a  weary  sequel  to  the  earlier 
phase  of  the  struggle,  and  its  chief  interest  lies  in  the  extra- 
ordinary display  of  energy  on  the  part  of  Henry  IV.  From  his 
encampment  on  the  Neronian  field,  he  set  to  work  to  revive  all 
the  old  Imperial  factions.  He  sought  out  the  remnants  of  the 
Cadalus-Benzo  party,  he  attracted  the  Tusculan  interest,  and 
revived  the  pretensions  of  the  extinct  Senate.  He  espoused  the 
cause  of  anti-reform  wherever  he  found  an  opportunity :  every 
obsolete  battle-cry  found  an  echo  in  his  camp.  He  fanned  the 
republican  spark  in  the  dominions  of  Matilda,  and  sanctioned  the 
revolts  of  Pisa,  Lucca,  and  Genoa — three  of  her  most  valuable 
towns — which  accepted  the  freedom  of  Imperial  cities  at  the 
hands  of  the  German  King.  To  Ravenna,  where  Henry  fixed  his 
winter-quarters,  the  Eastern  Emperor  sent  a  request  for  his 
alliance  against  the  Normans. 

In  spite  of  the  turn  of  the  tide,  Henry  was  repulsed  in  1082 
in  an  attempt  on  Rome,  and  had  to  fall  back  on  the  Campagna. 
The  attraction  of  the  superman  still  clung  about  his  rival,  and 
showed  itself  in  the  tenacious  loyalty  of  Matilda  and  the  dogged 
fidelity  of  fickle  Rome.  Only  after  three  years'  resistance — in 
June,  1083 — did  the  populace  waver  in  its  enthusiasm.  Gregory's 
friends  implored  him  to  make  peace,  but  he  refused  to  hear  of 
compromise  "unless  the  King  lay  down  his  crown,  and  make 
satisfaction  to  the  Church".  Henry's  reply  was  to  rush  the 
Leonina,  and  establish  himself  in  the  newer  half  of  the  city. 
In  February,  1084,  the  anti-pope  Wilbert  was  crowned  in  St. 
Peter's  as  Clement  III. ;  he  instantly  proceeded  to  the  coronation 
of  Henry  as  Holy  Roman  Emperor.  Gregory  began  to  see  that 
his  days  in  Rome  were  numbered,  and  reluctantly  fell  back  on 


THE  PAPACY  UNDER  HILDEBRAND  123 

his  emergency  policy.  He  issued  a  compelling  summons  to 
Robert  Guiscard.  knowing  that  it  meant  the  sacrifice  of  Rome 
for  the  honour  of  St.  Peter.  Robert  Guiscard  came,  and  at  his 
back  a  wild  horde  of  fighting-men,  composed  of  Saracens, 
Greeks,  and  Normans.  The  desperate  off-scourings  of  Southern 
Europe  were  let  loose  in  the  streets  of  Rome.  They  made  short 
work  of  Henry  and  his  Germans,  but  they  also  struck  the  hero 
of  Rome  from  his  pedestal.  Gregory  had  counted  the  cost.  As 
he  took  his  way  southward,  escorted  by  Robert,  he  knew  that  he 
could  never  show  his  face  again  in  the  city  which  had  idolised 
him,  which  had  saved  his  life  in  the  conspiracy  of  Cencius,  and 
stood  by  him  in  the  hour  of  defeat — which  in  the  last  resort  had 
made  on  his  behalf  the  ultimate  sacrifice.  Still  he  did  not 
flinch,  and  he  was  never  more  imperious  than  in  this,  the 
darkest  hour.  Was  it  the  desperate  courage  of  a  hero  in  mis- 
fortune, determined  to  die  worthily ;  or  did  he  see  through  the 
semblance  of  failure  to  the  reality  of  victory  ?  At  Monte  Cassino 
he  was  received  with  affectionate  honour  by  his  friend,  the 
Abbot  Desiderius ;  at  Salerno  he  lived  for  a  year  as  the  guest  of 
Robert  Guiscard.  In  May,  1085,  he  called  his  followers  to  his 
side,  and  informed  them  that  he  had  only  eight  days  more  to 
live.  He  faced  death  as  he  had  encountered  the  crises  of  life, 
with  the  simplicity  of  entire  devotedness.  A  statesman  to  the 
last,  he  made  provision  for  the  future,  suggesting  four  possible 
successors,  and  among  them  his  friend,  Desiderius.  Then, 
turning  away  from  politics,  which  had  never  wearied  him 
because  he  made  them  his  highest  self-expression,  he  pro- 
nounced his  own  epitaph  :  "  I  have  loved  righteousness  and 
hated  iniquity :   therefore,  I  die  in  exile ". 

A  contemporary  of  Gregory's  —  Cardinal  Deusdedit  —  sum- 
marised the  ideal  which  he  lived  to  vindicate  in  twenty-seven 
propositions,  expressed  in  the  spirit,  probably  in  the  language, 
of  Gregory  himself.  "The  Roman  Church,"  he  writes,  "has 
been  founded  by  God  alone.  Only  the  Pope  has  the  right  to 
issue  new  laws,  to  found  new  sees,  to  depose  bishops  without 
the  sentence  of  a  synod.  He  alone  has  the  right  to  make  use 
of  the  imperial  insignia.  He  alone  offers  his  foot  to  be  kissed 
by  princes.  His  name  alone  is  invoked  in  all  Churches.  His 
name  Pope  is  unique  in  the  world.  He  has  the  right  to  depose 
emperors.  He  can  release  subjects  from  their  allegiance  to 
unjust  rulers.  Without  his  authority  no  chapter,  no  book, 
is  canonical.  His  decision  is  unimpeachable.  He  can  be 
judged  by  no  one.  The  Roman  Church  has  never  erred,  and 
never  will  err  throughout  eternity,  as  the  Holy  Scriptures  prove. 


124  A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

If  the  Roman  Pope  has  been  canonically  elected,  he  becomes 
holy  by  the  merits  of  S.  Peter,  He  only  is  Catholic  who  is  in 
unity  with  the  Roman  Church ". 

In  revolutionary  courage,  this  ideal  has  never  been  equalled, 
but  it  owed  its  realisation — as  far  as  it  was  realised — to  the 
stamp  of  authority  with  which  it  seemed  to  be  sealed.  No  one 
guessed  at  the  extent  of  the  innovation ;  many  there  were 
who  were  not  quite  sure  whether  it  was  new  at  all.  This  was 
Hildebrand's  secret,  and  its  discovery  was  the  greatest  of  his 
achievements.  He  looked  back  through  the  mists  of  the  past, 
and  claimed  to  draw  aside  the  veil.  He  caught  at  the  vague 
terminology  of  the  "  spiritualia,"  and  gave  it  the  force  of  a 
political  logic.  He  applied  the  loose  metaphors  of  the  canonists 
to  the  existing  conditions  and  pressed  them  to  their  ultimate 
conclusion.  He  found  the  Papacy  a  delegacy  of  the  German 
kingdom ;  he  left  it  an  independent  and  militant  Empire. 


PART  III 
THE  MIDDLE  AGES 


CHAPTER  XIII 
THE  INVESTITURE  WAR,  a.d.  1085-1122 

GREGORY'S  magnificent  career  had  ended  in  exile  and 
apparent  defeat,  but  his  victory  was  still  unconsum- 
mated  and  his  achievement  far  from  complete.  The 
clue  to  the  reality  of  his  triumph  is  to  be  found  in  the  epoch 
of  which  he  is  the  founder,  rather  than  in  his  own  genera- 
tion. It  requires  the  perspective  of  history  to  do  justice 
to  an  idea  of  such  immense  significance  as  that  of  the  Hilde- 
brandine  Papacy.  The  followers  who  stood  round  the  grave  of 
the  Pope  at  Salerno  mourned  for  his  ideals  as  those  without 
hope,  bewailing  the  colossal  energy  spent  in  vain,  and  the  heroic 
toil  so  tragically  unrequited.  Many  of  them  lived  to  see  their 
pessimism  disproved,  for,  sombre  and  despairing,  they  stood  in 
the  cheerless  half-light  which  ushers  in  the  splendour  of  dawn. 

The  figure  of  Hildebrand  stands  midway  between  the  old 
order  and  the  new.  Behind  him  lay  the  "  Dark  Ages  "  of  chaos 
and  anarchy,  and  before  him  stretch  the  "  Middle  Ages  "  of 
chivalry.  For  the  period  which  is  dominated  by  his  memory 
is  the  era  of  the  Crusades — of  monastic  revival  in  its 
noblest  expression,  and  of  mediaeval  thought  at  its  richest  and 
best.  Romance  throughout  the  ages,  and  Romanticists  from 
Mallory  to  Tennyson,  have  delighted  to  idealise  and  embellish 
its  institutions,  and  to  portray  with  unerring  historical  instinct 
the  child-like  sincerity  of  the  most  religious  of  all  ages. 

At  the  head  of  the  new  Europe — at  once  the  pivot  on  which 
the  system  turned,  and  the  highest  expression  of  the  spirit  of 
the  age — stood  the  new  Papacy,  strong  in  the  strength  of  its 
moral  regeneration,  and  lifted  high  above  the  clouds  of  political 
idealism.  Never  before  or  after  has  the  great  papal  idea 
approached  so  nearly  to  its  fulfilment,  and  never  was  the  mag- 
nificence of  its  conception  more  strikingly  revealed.  Hildebrand 
had  died  in  exile,  but  the  Hildebrandine  ideal  shone  triumphant 
out  of  the  darkness,  and  through  the  mists  of  apparent  failure 
rose  steadily  to  its  zenith. 

For  the  moment,  the  outlook  was  dark  enough.     The  little 

127 


128  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

group  of  friends  who  had  followed  Gregory  to  Salerno  cowered 
before  the  on-coming  storm,  and  sought  in  vain  to  replace  the 
lost  leader.  For  two  years,  Desiderius  of  Monte  Casino  fought 
to  avoid  the  pontificate,  which  the  Hildebrandine  party,  acting 
on  the  impulse  of  obedience  to  the  memory  of  their  hero, 
sought  to  thrust  on  his  unwilling  shoulders.  Desiderius  was  a 
man  of  blameless  life,  and  an  able  diplomatist,  but  he  lacked 
the  force  of  character  to  deal  successfully  with  a  crisis.  Gregory 
had  chosen  him  as  his  successor  chiefly  because  he  was  on  the 
spot,  and  because  it  was  necessary  that  there  should  be  no  delay 
in  pushing  forward  the  campaign  against  Henry  IV.  Finally, 
the  Roman  populace  forced  Desiderius  to  acquiesce  and  assume 
the  title  of  Victor  III.  The  death  of  Robert  Guiscard,  however, 
and  the  defection  of  his  son,  Roger,  made  his  position  in  Rome 
very  critical,  and  his  half-hearted  efiforts  brought  him  defeat 
and  expulsion  at  the  hands  of  the  Imperial  Prefect. 

Then  it  was  that  the  Gregorian  party  began  to  consider  the 
advisability  of  electing  another  Pope,  which  had  the  effect  of 
goading  Desiderius  to  activity.  From  March,  1087,  to  the  fol- 
lowing September,  Victor  III.  and  the  anti-pope,  Clement, 
fought  face  to  face  in  and  about  the  city  of  Rome.  Victor's 
death  interrupted  the  campaign,  and  made  room  for  an  abler 
man — the  political  lieutenant  and  the  intellectual  successor  of 
Gregory  VII. 

Urban  11.^  was  a  French  nobleman,  with  the  characteristic 
grace  and  agility  of  his  nation  and  his  class.  As  Abbot  of  Cluny 
he  had  served  his  apprenticeship  as  an  ecclesiastical  ruler,  and 
as  legate  in  Germany  he  had  studied  the  policy  and  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  hierarchical  party.  He  came  to  Rome  in  1088, 
escorted  by  a  Norman  army,  and  announced  his  intention  of 
following  in  the  footsteps  of  Hildebrand. 

Hurling  defiance  across  the  Tiber  at  his  rival,  Clement  III., 
he  set  to  work  instantly  to  restore  the  fortunes  of  his  demoral- 
ised party.  The  waning  loyalty  of  the  great  Countess  of  Tus- 
cany was  revived  by  an  unsuitable  marriage  with  the  boy-heir 
of  the  House  of  Gwelf,  which  introduced  for  the  first  time  a  name 
hereafter  to  be  linked  inseparably  with  the  political  fortunes  of 
the  Papacy.  The  Gwelfs  of  Bavaria  now  played  the  part  which 
Godfrey  of  Lotharingia  had  filled  in  the  preceding  generation, 
as  the  arch-rebels  of  the  Imperial  throne.  Hence  the  alliance 
between  the  Houses  of  Bavaria  and  Tuscany  served  for  the 
moment  to  infuse  new  strength  into  the  Hildebrandine  party, 

1 1088-99. 


THE  INVESTITURE  WAR  129 

In  1090,  Henry  IV.  found  it  necessary  to  come  back  to  Italy  to 
oppose  this  new  alliance.  Rome,  weary  of  strife,  turned  to  the 
Emperor  as  to  a  deliverer,  and  welcomed  his  decree  of  banish- 
ment directed  against  both  the  Popes.  His  recall  of  Clement 
III.  in  the  following  year,  and  the  subsequent  fall  of  Mantua, 
the  centre  of  Matilda's  resistance,  created  a  panic  in  the  papal 
party,  and  led  to  one  of  the  most  deplorable  of  their  counter- 
moves.  They  turned  to  Conrad,  the  weak  and  discontented  son 
of  Henry  IV.,  and  incited  him  to  revolt  against  his  father.  They 
encouraged  his  priggish  disapproval  of  Henry,  and  threatened 
him  with  spiritual  and  temporal  disasters  if  he  continued  in  his 
opposition  to  Urban  II.  The  disloyal  and  pliable  youth  was 
easily  won :  a  Lombard  league  was  formed  in  his  name,  and  he 
was  crowned  anti-king  at  Milan,  When,  in  1093,  Henry's  second 
wife  joined  the  rebels,  his  impetuous  spirit  was  broken.  The 
fortunes  of  Urban  revived;  he  returned  to  Rome  in  1094,  under 
the  protection  of  the  Frangipani,  his  debts  were  paid  by  Godfrey 
of  Vendome,  and  the  constructive  aspect  of  his  pontijQcate  was 
in  sight. 

Urban  saw  that  the  struggle  between  the  Papacy  and  the  Em- 
pire had  loomed  too  large  on  the  horizon  since  Canossa;  Christen- 
dom was  tired  of  it,  and  demanded  something  else  to  think 
about.  The  panacea  which  he  offered  was  not  an  original  one, 
but  in  its  production  at  this  particular  moment  we  detect  a 
genuine  flash  of  political  inspiration.  The  capture  of  Jerusalem 
by  the  Turks,  in  1076,  had  brought  a  flock  of  outraged  pilgrims 
to  Rome,  with  tales  of  sacrilege  and  atrocity,  which  had  moved 
their  hearers  to  the  kindred  mediaeval  passions  of  pity  and 
ferocity.  Hildebrand  took  up  the  cause  as  warmly  as  his  politi- 
cal pre-occupations  would  admit,  and  Robert  Guiscard  had  al- 
ready responded  to  the  appeal.  But  it  was  reserved  for  Urban 
II.  to  give  the  movement  its  pan-European  setting,  and  to  assitin 
to  it  its  importance  in  history.  In  March,  1095,  Urban  preached 
the  first  Crusade  at  the  Council  of  Piacenza.  The  response 
which  greeted  his  appeal  justified  him  in  calling  a  second  and 
more  general  assembly  at  Clermont  in  the  following  November. 
Peter  the  Hermit  carried  the  tidings  over  the  Alps,  and  urged 
all  sinners  to  win  unconditional  forgiveness  by  means  of  the 
Holy  War.  The  congenial  penance  of  fighting  and  pillage  was 
offered  as  a  substitute  for  the  wearisome  pilgrimage  or  the 
humiliating  personal  chastisement.  What  wonder  that  Urban 
was  greeted  at  Clermont  by  a  crowd  which  committed  him  irre- 
vocably to  the  Crusading  enterprise,  on  a  scale  which  exceeded 
all  anticipation  ? 
9 


130  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

Among  the  crowd  of  saints  and  sinners  which  mobilised 
under  the  Crusading  banner,  there  was  no  lack  of  pure  en- 
thusiasm for  the  Holy  Sepulchre  to  be  set  ablaze  by  the 
eloquence  of  the  Pope.  But  it  was  to  the  rough  hearts'  of  the 
warrior -penitents  that  his  words  were  more  urgently  directed. 
"  Rise,  turn  your  weapons,  dripping  with  the  blood  of  your 
brothers,  against  the  enemy  of  the  Christian  faith.  You, 
oppressors  of  orphans  and  widows ;  you,  murderers  and  violators 
of  Churches ;  you,  robbers  of  the  property  of  others ;  you,  who 
accept  money  to  shed  the  blood  of  Christians ;  you,  who  like 
vultures  are  drawn  by  the  scent  of  the  battle-field,  hasten,  as 
you  love  your  souls,  under  your  Captain  Christ  to  the  rescue  of 
Jerusalem.  All  you  who  are  guilty  of  such  sins  as  exclude  you 
from  the  kingdom  of  God,  ransom  yourselves  at  this  price,  for 
such  is  the  will  of  God  ". 

The  shout  of  "  Dieu  le  veult"  sealed  the  words  of  the  Pope 
with  the  assent  of  Christendom,  and  for  better  or  worse  the  first 
Crusade  was  launched.  The  devout  Normans  of  Italy,  under 
their  hero-leaders  Tancred  and  Boemund,  were  the  first  to  re- 
spond ;  their  brothers  of  France  and  England,  under  Robert  of 
Flanders,  Robert  of  Normandy,  and  Stephen  of  Blois,  and  the 
royal  forces  of  France  under  the  king's  brother,  Hugh  of  Verman- 
dois,  followed  in  course  of  time.  The  Pope  blessed  the  forces  at 
Lucca,  and  pronounced  the  plenary  absolution  on  the  just  and 
the  unjust  among  them.  As  they  passed  through  Rome  and 
knelt  before  the  shrine  of  the  Apostles,  the  partisans  of  the 
powerless  anti-pope  threw  missiles  from  the  roof  of  St.  Peter's  on 
to  the  heads  of  the  kneeling  warriors,  thus  proving  by  their  petty 
demonstration  their  recognition  of  Urban's  triumph. 

The  Emperor  alone  had  held  aloof  from  the  first  Crusade, 
and  in  so  doing  missed  the  greatest  opportunity  of  his  life.  The 
defection  of  Henry  IV.  enabled  the  Popes  thereafter  to  claim,  as 
originators  of  the  idea,  to  have  efi"ected  the  results  which  ensued. 
And  in  this  assumption  they  were  undoubtedly  justified.  The 
leadership  of  Europe  was  at  stake  ;  the  Emperor,  absorbed  in  his 
own  concerns,  let  the  opportunity  pass,  and  the  Pope,  as  so  often 
before,  stepped  into  the  breach. 

Urban  did  not  long  survive  his  great  enterprise,  and  his  death 
in  1099  marks  the  passing  of  Hildebrand's  generation.  He  was 
soon  followed  to  the  grave  by  his  rival,  Clement  III.,  in  whose 
harassed  life  all  recognised  that  of  a  hero,  and  some  that  of  a 
saint.  The  miracles  worked  at  his  grave  caused  some  difficulty 
to  the  successor  of  Urban,  who  was  obliged  in  self-defence  to 
throw  his  bones  into  the  Tiber.     In  1101,  young  Conrad — the 


THE  INVESTITURE  WAR  131 

hope  of  the  hierarchical  party — alec  died,  and,  five  years  later, 
the  death  of  his  father  brought  the  epilogue  of  the  Canossa 
drama  to  an  end.  Henry  IV.  died,  excommunicated  and 
deposed,  but  not  altogether  inglorious.  Throughout  his  ad- 
venturous life  he  had  never  vs^anted  a  small  band  of  faithful 
adherents,  ready  to  serve  him  to  the  death,  and  at  the  close, 
when  it  was  too  late  to  be  of  any  assistance,  he  won  back  the 
support  of  the  young  Gwelf,  who  had  quarrelled  with  Matilda 
and  broken  with  the  Gregorian  party.  Henry  had  failed  because, 
unlike  Gregory,  his  aims  had  been  too  diffuse,  and  his  energy 
too  spasmodic.  The  absence  of  any  consistent  object  in  his 
policy  threw  him  always  on  the  defensive,  and  the  man  who 
fights  with  his  back  to  the  wall  has  not  much  scope  for  initiative. 
For  this  reason,  Henry  was  always  seen  at  his  best  after  defeat ; 
his  volatile  nature  made  him  as  quick  to  recover  from  a  blow  as 
to  be  quelled  by  it.  The  recovery  of  the  penitent  of  Canossa 
after  his  humiliation  is  only  less  remarkable  than  the  victory  of 
Gregory,  and  it  is  not  in  every  generation  that  an  Emperor  has 
such  an  adversary  to  face. 

The  troubled  reign  of  Paschalis  II. — a  Cluniac  monk  of 
saintly  character  and  insufficient  political  force — ushers  in  the 
new  generation.  The  first  six  years  of  his  pontificate  were 
monopolised  by  petty  wars  with  the  barons,  who  in  the  absence 
of  Imperial  authority  were  eager  to  assert  their  feudal  indepen- 
dence in  repeated  attacks  on  the  Papacy.  The  great  House  of 
Colonna  offered  territorial  opposition  in  Latium.  The  Corsi 
defied  Paschalis  in  Rome  and,  assisted  by  the  Margrave  Werner, 
supported  Maginulf  as  anti-pope,  and  forced  Paschalis  to  flee 
to  the  Tiber  island  for  refuge.  A  breathing-space  in  1106  gave 
an  opening  for  the  real  business  of  the  pontificate — the  solution 
of  the  Investiture  problem.  Everyone  longed  for  peace,  but 
no  one  was  willing  to  pay  the  price.  The  compromise  proposed 
by  Paschalis  at  the  Diet  of  Guastalla  was,  moreover,  inadequate 
and  impossible.  His  suggestion  was  that  the  Investiture  Edict 
should  be  enforced  but  that  the  schismatic  Bishops  appointed 
by  Clement  III.  should  be  recognised.  The  settlement  was 
to  be  concluded  the  following  Christmas  at  Augsburg.  The 
sole  result  was  the  increase  of  the  general  discontent  on  both 
sides.  Paschalis  in  despair  set  out  for  France,  but  in  his 
absence  the  baronial  revolt  broke  out  afresh,  and  the  Pope  was 
obliged  to  force  his  way  back  to  Rome  with  the  assistance  of  a 
Norman  escort. 

Such  was  the  state  of  aff'airs  when,  in  1110,  Henry  V.  came 
to  claim  the  Imperial  Crown  which  the  distracted  Pope  had 


132  A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

promised  to  bestow  on  him  in  return  for  a  vague  oath  of 
reverence  to  the  Church.  The  Emperor-designate  was  the  least 
attractive  of  the  interesting  series  of  Imperial  candidates  who 
found  their  way  across  the  Alps  in  the  Middle  Ages.  Cold  and 
calculating,  he  compels  our  admiration  by  his  very  relentless- 
ness  in  the  pursuance  of  his  immediate  end.  While  Paschalis 
hid  his  fears  behind  bold  words  and  reissued  the  Investiture 
Edict,  while  he  summoned  the  Normans  to  protect  him,  Henry 
pressed  on  through  Lombardy  with  30,000  troops  at  his  back. 
The  Lombards,  proud  of  their  new  independence,  tried  to  oppose 
him,  but  Henry  burnt  every  fortress  which  ofifered  resistance, 
and  even  Matilda  was  forced  to  submit  and  take  the  oath  of 
vassalage. 

Paschalis  sent  his  envoys  to  Henry  at  Turin,  where  the 
Pope's  second  peace  proposition  was  laid  before  him.  The  new 
scheme,  which  looks  at  first  sight  like  a  quixotic  sacrifice  on  the 
part  of  the  Pope,  was,  in  reality,  the  last  resort  of  an  exhausted 
combatant.  Paschalis  proposed  that  the  Bishops  should  sur- 
render their  temporal  fiefs  and  live  on  their  tithes,  while  the 
Emperor  on  his  side  was  to  renounce  the  right  of  investiture. 
The  Church  was  to  be  poor,  but  free :  in  return  for  the  political 
advantage  of  their  new  status,  the  Bishops  were  to  embrace  the 
Apostolic  condition  of  personal  poverty.  But  the  Papacy,  on  the 
other  hand,  was  to  retain  its  Dominium  intact,  and  the  Bishops 
were  not  slow  to  seize  upon  the  inconsistency  underlying  this 
aspect  of  the  settlement.  The  attitude  which  Henry  adopted 
does  more  credit  to  his  astuteness  than  to  his  sincerity.  He 
perused  the  treaty,  saw  through  it,  and  beyond  it,  to  the  havoc 
which  it  would  create,  and  finally  adopted  it.  Relentless  and 
inscrutable,  he  pressed  on  to  Rome,  concealing  under  a  mask  of 
passive  disdain  the  passions  of  an  avenger  of  Canossa.  He  took 
no  pains  to  ingratiate  himself  with  the  crowd  which  assembled 
at  Monte  Mario  to  do  him  honour ;  he  answered  their  flowery 
Latin  orations  in  rough  German,  and  laughed  at  the  solemn 
greetings  of  the  scholae. 

It  was  not  until  the  decree  of  Paschalis  was  read  in  St. 
Peter's  that  the  attitude  of  Henry  was  finally  revealed.  A 
storm  of  indignation  from  the  dispossessed  Bishops  greeted  the 
Pope's  well-meaning  manifesto.  Henry,  by  a  bold  volte-face, 
dissociated  himself  from  the  treaty,  lent  his  sympathy  to  the 
Bishops,  and  fanned  the  general  discontent  which  the  papal 
action  had  excited.  Surrounded  by  German  swords  and 
menaced  by  episcopal  threats,  Paschalis  found  himself  at  the 
mercy  of  the  Emperor.     The  populace  of  Rome  tried  to  come  to 


THE  INVESTITURE  WAR  133 

the  rescue,  and  nearly  succeeded ;  the  battle  of  the  Leonina  is 
a  marked  instance  of  what  an  unarmed  mob  of  loyal  ruffians 
can  do  against  a  trained  force  of  paid  warriors.  But  the 
Emperor  eluded  the  Romans  by  escaping  to  the  Sabina  by  night, 
taking  with  him  the  Pope  and  the  whole  papal  Curia.  Hounded 
in  droves  along  the  marshy  roads,  the  Cardinals  learnt  the 
methods  of  German  warfare.  For  61  days,  they  were  insulted 
and  oppressed  in  the  Emperor's  tents,  while  the  Emperor  sought 
in  vain  to  extort  from  Paschalis  a  promise  of  unconditional 
surrender  on  the  Investiture  question.  At  last,  the  pleading  of 
the  Cardinals  and  the  threats  of  massacring  all  the  prisoners 
which  Henry  put  forward,  reduced  the  Pope  to  submission. 
Paschalis  did  not  lack  personal  courage,  but  he  was  vanquished 
because  his  heart  was  not  proof  against  the  misery  of  war.  He 
yielded  with  dignity  and  good  faith.  "  I  tender  this  oath  in 
order  that  you  may  fulfil  yours,"  he  said,  when  Henry  con- 
fronted him  with  the  charter  of  surrender. 

The  verbal  definition  of  division  of  authority  was  designed 
to  conceal,  as  far  as  possible,  the  humiliation  of  the  Pope. 

"Thou  shalt  impart  Investiture  with  ring  and  stafi"  to  the 
Bishops  and  Abbots  of  thine  Empire,  who  shall  be  elected  with- 
out force  and  simony ;  after  their  canonical  installation  they 
shall  receive  consecration  from  the  Bishop  whose  duty  it  is  to 
give  it.  .  .  .  Shall  any  spiritual  or  secular  power  or  person  dare 
to  despise  or  subvert  this  our  privilegium,  he  shall  be  entangled 
within  the  chains  of  our  anathema  and  be  deprived  of  all 
honours.  May  the  divine  mercy  protect  all  who  respect  it,  and 
grant  thy  Majesty  a  happy  Empire." 

The  Coronation,  which  was  hurried  through  in  April,  1111, 
sealed  the  one-sided  peace.  It  was  not  the  fault  of  the  Pope 
that  the  settlement  was  not  final.  Paschalis'  sincerity  is  quite 
indisputable,  both  at  the  time,  and  subsequently.  "May  he 
who  attempts  to  violate  this  treaty  be  thus  severed  from  the 
kingdom  of  God,"  he  said,  as  he  solemnly  broke  the  Host  before 
his  enemies.  But  he  had  reckoned  without  the  Gregorian  party, 
which  was  still  the  dominant  force  in  papal  politics.  No  sooner 
was  the  Pope's  submission  known  than  a  synod  of  protest  was 
summoned  to  condemn  both  himself  and  his  charter.  The 
counter-decrees  of  Urban  and  Gregory  were  revived,  and  the 
new  Privilegium  was  annulled.  He  was  only  saved  from 
personal  condemnation  through  the  championship  of  Ivo  of 
Chartres.  who  procured  his  acquittal  on  the  ground  that  he  had 
acted  under  compulsion.  Paschalis  was  not  ready  at  first  to 
shelter  himself  behind  the  plea  of  weakness :    he  resented  the 


134  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

tone  of  the  hierarchs,  and  he  still  meant  to  keep  faith  with 
Henry.  But  he  was  attempting  the  impossible  in  trying  to 
harmonise  two  irreconcilable  principles,  and,  before  long,  he 
was  obliged  to  reopen  the  whole  contest.  The  Lateran  Council 
of  1112,  summoned  by  Paschalis  to  decide  the  fate  of  the  Privi- 
legium,  acquitted  the  Pope  on  the  grounds  brought  forward  by 
Ivo  of  Chartres,  but  annulled  his  Charter,  and,  as  a  matter  of 
form,  sent  the  counter-decrees  to  the  Emperor  for  ratification, 
which  was,  of  course,  refused. 

Once  more  Paschalis'  efforts  to  put  an  end  to  the  Investiture 
contest  had  broken  down.  He  had  tried  to  cry  peace  where 
there  was  no  peace,  to  slur  over  discord,  and  to  throw  dust  in 
the  eyes  of  both  parties.  It  is,  however,  difficult  to  condemn 
him  for  shrinking  from  the  alternative  course  which  Hildebrand 
might  have  adopted.  Paschalis  had  taken  the  weak  line 
deliberately,  because  his  desire  for  immediate  peace  outweighed 
all  other  considerations,  and  because  he  was  not  prepared  to 
trust  his  cause  to  the  fortune  of  war.  From  the  point  of  view 
of  high  papal  policy,  he  was  the  wrong  man  in  the  wrong  place, 
but  this  does  not  prevent  us  from  paying  the  tribute  of  respect 
to  his  unusual  grace  of  character.  The  sincere  humility  of  his 
confession  of  failure  before  the  Council,  combined  with  his 
refusal  to  retaliate  against  Henry  either  by  word  or  deed,  forms 
a  picture  in  which" his  political  inadequacy  is  mitigated  by  his 
moral  generosity. 

The  Investiture  problem  was  as  far  from  a  logical  solution  as 
ever,  but  when  Henry  left  Italy,  after  the  Lateran  Council,  its 
importance  paled  for  a  time  before  the  rise  of  a  newer  and  more 
practical  contest.  In  July,  1115,  the  great  Countess  of  Tuscany 
died  at  the  age  of  seventy,  leaving  her  possessions  to  the  Papacy 
with  a  grand  and  lavish  vagueness  which  introduced  a  new 
phase  of  the  great  mediaeval  controversy.  Both  sides  were,  in  a 
sense,  prepared  for  it :  Hildebrand  had  known  of  Matilda's 
intention,  and  the  scheme  was  the  real  cause  of  her  quarrel  with 
the  young  Gwelf.  But  the  indefinite  wording  of  the  donation, 
and  the  reasonable  disputes  which  arose  as  to  what  she  actually 
had  meant,  produced  a  four-sided  struggle  which  took  Italy 
entirely  by  surprise.  The  claim  of  the  Papacy  to  inherit  the 
whole  of  Matilda's  dominions  was  disputed  in  three  directions, 
and  in  each  case  with  some  semblance  of  validity.  Gwelf  V. 
claimed  that  at  least  her  allodial  lands  belonged  to  him  of  right 
as  her  wedded  lord.  The  Emperor  set  out  to  seize  her  imperial 
fiefs,  and  also  brought  forward  a  further  claim  to  the  allodial 
lands  as  a  member  of  the  House  of  Lorraine,  and  consequent 


THE  INVESTITURE  WAR  135 

heir  to  the  claims  of  Matilda's  first  husband,  Godfrey.  Still 
more  formidable  than  the  personal  rivals  of  the  Papal  heritage 
were  the  republican  constitutions  of  the  cities  which  had  success- 
fully attained  freedom  in  the  lifetime  of  Matilda.  Against  some 
of  these  new  and  vigorous  democracies,  the  Popes  recognised  at 
once  that  it  was  hopeless  to  protest :  Pisa,  Lucca,  Siena,  Flor- 
ence and  Arezzo  were  never  even  claimed.  But  Modena, 
Reggio,  Mantua  and  Parma  were  intermittently  subjugated, 
while  Ferrara  submitted  at  once  as  an  actual  fief. 

The  importance  of  Matilda's  donation  is  best  seen  in  the 
immense  alteration  which  it  produced  in  the  position  of  the 
Papacy.  Hildebrand  had  laboured  that  the  Church  might  be 
free  ;  Matilda  gave  it  the  wherewithal  of  freedom.  In  the 
struggle  to  realise  the  bequest,  and  the  clash  of  interests  which 
was  involved,  the  Popes  were  not  merely  acting  as  mercenary 
and  misguided  agents  of  ambition.  It  should  not  be  forgotten 
that  real  principles  of  statesmanship  were  at  stake — principles 
which  are  open  both  to  political  criticism  and  to  moral  censure 
from  the  modern  point  of  view,  but  which  to  the  average 
mediaeval  churchman  were  both  ethically  and  logically  inviol- 
able. It  is  true  that  the  principle  of  temporal  power  was  not 
allowed  to  pass  unchallenged,  and  that  the  controversy  was 
carried  very  soon  into  the  region  of  ideas.  But  the  contests  of 
the  schoolmen  are  only  mediaeval  on  the  one  side  :  Abelard  and 
Arnold  of  Brescia,  however  much  they  seem  to  belong  to  the 
Middle  Ages  in  their  methods,  their  language,  and  their  manner 
of  thinking,  are  in  reality  the  precursors  of  Wyclif  and  of 
Luther  —  of  Protestantism  and  —  untechnically  speaking  —  of 
modernism. 

But  not  so  the  Emperor  Henry  V.,  who  set  out  for  Rome  in 
1116,  with  the  twofold  object  of  claiming  Matilda's  lands  for  the 
Empire,  and  punishing  the  Pope  for  his  retraction  of  the  Privi- 
legium  of  Investiture.  He  could  not  have  timed  his  arrival  in 
Rome  better  for  his  purposes.  Paschalis  had  foolishly  embroiled 
himself  with  the  populace  over  a  question  of  electing  the  Prefect, 
He  was  obliged  to  flee  from  the  city,  leaving  Ptolemy  of  Tusculum 
in  charge  of  the  ecclesiastical  property  in  his  absence.  Never 
did  emperor  receive  a  warmer  welcome  in  the  city.  The  popu- 
lace greeted  him  with  joy,  and  listened  respectfully  to  his  bom- 
bastic speech  in  the  market-place,  forgetful  of  his  former 
insolence  towards  them.  He  confirmed  the  young  Prefect 
Peter,  whose  election  the  Pope  had  opposed.  He  won  over 
Ptolemy  of  Tusculum  by  giving  him  his  illegitimate  daughter 
in  marriage,  and  caused  the  legate  Burdinus  to  perform  the 


136  A  SHOBT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

customary  repetition  of  the  coronation  ceremony  on  Easter 
Day.  Only  the  higher  clergy  turned  their  backs  on  him,  and 
rejected  his  overtures,  but  their  defection  finally  turned  the 
scale.  Unaccountably  as  ever,  Rome  soon  wearied  of  Henry, 
and,  incited  by  the  Cardinals,  rallied  once  more  to  the  Papal 
standard.  But  the  final  efi"ort,  by  which  the  Pope  re- 
gained the  city,  killed  him.  Paschalis  was  old,  and  life  had 
put  to  a  severe  test  his  limited  powers.  Few  Popes  have 
had  a  more  unfortunate  career,  but  he  died  in  the  hour 
of  victory. 

His  successor,  John  of  Gaeta,  was  elected,  by  a  majority  of 
Cardinals,  in  secret,  in  accordance  with  the  decree  of  Nicholas  II. 
Old  and  infirm,  he  struggled  against  the  dignity,  and  submitted 
only  to  compulsion.  Immediately  after  the  election  occurred 
one  of  the  curious  cases  of  repetition  which  are  not  infrequent 
among  the  dramatic  episodes  of  history.  Cencius  Frangipani, 
with  a  mob  of  furious  citizens  at  his  back,  rushed  into  the  con- 
clave, bound  the  Cardinals,  and  trod  the  old  Pope  under  foot. 
John  of  Gaeta,  newly-elected  Gelasius  II.,  was  carried  ofi"  and 
imprisoned  in  the  Frangipani  castle,  whence  he  was  finally  re- 
leased, like  a  second  Hildebrand,  by  the  Roman  people.  Hardly 
had  he  regained  his  liberty  when  Henry  V.  swept  down 
on  Rome  to  retrieve  his  fortunes.  In  the  time  of  Paschalis, 
Gelasius  had  already  undergone  captivity  at  the  hands  of  the 
Emperor,  and  he  was  unwilling  to  repeat  the  experience.  He 
therefore  fled  to  Gaeta,  where  to  his  surprise  he  was  welcomed 
by  a  readily-equipped  host  of  loyal  Normans,  eager  to  do  him 
homage. 

History  again  repeats  itself  in  the  scene  which  followed.  We 
find  Gelasius,  deserted  by  the  Normans,  and  opposed  in  Rome 
by  Burdinus,  now  raised  by  Henry  to  fill  the  role  of  anti-pope. 
The  deluge  of  anathemas  and  mutual  recriminations  which 
thunder  across  the  city  recall  the  days  of  Benzo  and  Damiani. 
An  attack  on  Gelasius  at  Mass  in  the  Church  of  San  Prassede 
led  to  his  escape  from  Rome  and  honourable  reception  in  France, 
where  he  ended  his  troubled  pontificate  in  1119. 

He  was  succeeded  by  one  of  the  most  fortunate  Popes  of  the 
period,  whose  appointment  is  a  testimony  to  the  wisdom  of  his 
generation.  Guido  of  Vienne  was  the  chief  Bishop  of  France ; 
he  was  related  both  to  the  King  of  France  and  to  the  Emperor, 
and,  beyond  his  royal  lineage,  he  had  exceptional  talents  and  an 
attractive  manner  to  recommend  him.  He  at  once  took  a  de- 
cided line  on  the  Investiture  question.  At  Rheims,  on  his  way 
to  Rome,  he  reissued  the  Investiture  Edict  of  Hildebrand,  and 


THE  INVESTITURE  WAR  137 

he  was  supported  by  four  hundred  and  twenty -four  Bishops,  who 
threw  down  their  tapers  as  a  signal  of  defiance  to  the  Emperor. 
Results  justified  his  determination,  for  it  was  based  on  the  pro- 
foundest  desire  for  unity.  The  magnificence  of  the  new  Pope's 
reception  in  Rome  and  the  enthusiasm  of  the  populace  annihil- 
ated the  enfeebled  party  of  Burdinus,  who  surrendered  after  a 
show  of  resistance  at  Sutri.  Meanwhile  Guido,  who  took  the 
name  of  Calixtus  II.,  had  come  to  an  understanding  with  his 
cousin  the  Emperor,  and  a  series  of  German  Diets  undertook  the 
onus  of  preparing  a  treaty.  The  results  of  their  deliberations 
were  embodied  in  the  Concordat  of  Worms,  which  was  put  for- 
ward by  the  Council  in  September,  1122.  The  Pope  deputed 
Lambert  of  Ostia,  a  trained  canonist,  to  act  for  him,  and  he 
could  not  have  chosen  a  more  competent  representative.  Two 
short  treaties  comprised  the  gist. of  the  settlement,  which  put 
an  end  to  half  a  century  of  conflict. 

"I,  Henry,  for  the  love  of  God,  the  Holy  Roman  Church,  and 
of  the  Lord  Pope  Calixtus,  and  for  the  salvation  of  my  soul, 
abandon  to  God,  the  Holy  Apostles  Peter  and  Paul,  and  to  the 
Holy  Catholic  Church,  all  investiture  by  the  ring  and  the  staff, 
and  I  grant  that  in  all  the  churches  of  my  Empire  there  be 
freedom  of  election  and  free  consecration.  I  will  restore  all  the 
possessions  and  jurisdictions  of  St.  Peter  which  have  been  taken 
away  since  the  beginning  of  this  quarrel.  I  will  give  true  peace 
to  the  Lord  Pope  Calixtus  and  to  the  Holy  Roman  Church,  and 
I  will  faithfully  help  the  Holy  Roman  Church  whenever  she  in- 
vokes my  aid." 

"  I,  Calixtus,  the  Bishop,  grant  to  Henry,  Emperor  of  the 
Romans,  that  the  election  of  bishops  and  abbots  shall  take  place 
in  thy  presence  without  simony  or  violence,  so  that  if  any  dis- 
cord arise,  thou  mayest  grant  thy  approbation  and  support  to 
the  most  worthy  candidate,  after  the  counsel  of  the  Metropolitan 
and  his  suffragans.  Let  the  Prelate-elect  receive  from  thee  thy 
sceptre,  the  property  and  immunities  of  his  office,  and  let  him 
fulfil  his  obligations  to  thee  arising  from  these.  In  other  parts 
of  the  Empire  let  the  Prelate  receive  his  regalia  six  months 
after  his  consecration  and  fulfil  the  duties  arising  from  them. 
I  grant  true  peace  to  thee  and  all  who  have  been  of  thy  party 
during  the  times  of  discord." 

These  two  treaties,  duly  signed  by  Henry  and  Calixtus 
respectively,  effected  the  only  compromise  possible  on  the 
question  which  lay  at  the  root  of  the  conflict  between  the 
Papacy  and  the  Emperor.  Neither  side  capitulated,  and  neither 
could  boast  any  decisive  victory.     The  settlement  was  carefully 


138  A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

designed  to  conceal  any  semblance  of  humiliation  on  the  one 
hand  or  of  triumph  on  the  other.  If  either  side  seemed  to  have 
scored  in  the  immediate  question  at  issue,  it  was  the  Pope:  if 
either  side  had  actually  gained  any  substantial  advantage,  it 
was  the  Emperor.  But  the  honours  of  war  were  shadowy  and 
indecisive ;  sheer  weariness  had  brought  both  sides  to  an  under- 
standing, and  only  a  sense  of  the  futility  of  strife  prevented  a 
revival  of  the  Investiture  struggle.  It  was  only  one  phase  of  a 
larger  antagonism :  it  was  past  and  gone,  and  Europe  rejoiced  to 
see  the  last  of  it,  but  the  deeper  issues  remained  as  far  from 
solution  as  ever. 

Calixtus  had  the  good  fortune  to  die  while  the  world  was  still 
under  the  impression  that  the  Papacy  had  won  a  complete  and 
decisive  victory.  His  successor,  Honorius  II.  (1124-1130), 
although  he  was  elected  for  his  conspicious  abilities,  had  neither 
the  personality  nor  the  prestige  to  carry  on  his  work.  He  was 
the  same  Lambert  of  (Jstia  whom  Calixtus  had  chosen  to 
represent  him  at  Worms,  but  the  skilled  lawyer  had  not  the 
makings  of  an  equally  successful  Pope.  Moreover,  he  started  at 
a  disadvantage,  owing  to  the  revival  of  factions  among  the 
Roman  nobility,  with  unprecedented  bitterness  and  competitive 
strife.  Honorius  was  the  candidate  of  the  Frangipani,  and 
against  him  was  arrayed  the  might  of  the  Pierleoni.  The 
Frangipani  were  old  and  aristocratic ;  the  Pierleoni  were 
parvenus  of  Jewish  origin  with  democratic  sympathies.  The 
death  of  the  childless  Emperor  Henry  Y.  in  1125  carried  the 
politics  of  papal  Rome  into  Germany.  Honorius  and  the 
Frangipani  faction  favoured  the  middle-aged  and  orthodox 
Lothair  of  Supplinburg  against  his  young  and  magnificent  rival 
Frederick  Hohenstaufen,  who,  with  his  brother  Conrad,  repre- 
sented the  family  of  Weiblingen.  The  personal  strife  between 
the  rival  claimants  of  the  Imperial  throne  holds  a  fictitious 
importance  in  history  as  the  peg  on  which  a  contest  of  principles 
was  hung  by  later  ages.  Long  after  the  quarrel  between  Lothair 
and  Frederick  was  forgotten,  the  war-cries  of  Gwelf  and 
Ghibelline  resounded  in  the  streets  of  the  Italian  cities,  and 
rallied  the  partisans  of  causes  as  yet  unborn.  But  in  the  time 
of  Honorius,  the  duel  was  a  personal  one,  which  indirectly 
involved  the  Pope,  but  in  which  no  clash  of  principles  can  be 
traced,  except  a  vague  antagonism  between  the  clericalism  of 
Lothair  and  the  sturdy  independence  of  Frederick. 

Before  Honorius  died,  he  was  forced  reluctantly  to  sanction 
the  formation  of  the  kingdom  of  Naples  by  Roger  of  Sicily,  who 
had  succeeded  in  making  himself  Duke  of  Apulia  in  spite  of  the 


THE  INVESTITUKE  WAR  139 

persistent  opposition  of  the  Pope.  The  sheerest  necessity  had 
brought  Honorius  to  the  recognition  of  the  Neapolitan  monarchy, 
for  he  realised  the  danger  to  the  Papacy  which  it  threatened, 
and  his  successors  had  frequent  cause  to  regret  the  sanction 
which  established  a  rival  power  in  South  Italy  and  a  natural  foe 
at  their  gates. 

On  the  death  of  Honorius  in  1130,  the  dualism  which  had 
grown  up  during  his  reign  broke  out  into  schism.  The  Gwelf 
candidate,  Peter  Pierleoni,  stood  face  to  face  with  a  Ghibelline 
rival,  Gregory  of  St.  Angelo.  Peter  Pierleoni,  who  took  the 
name  of  Anaclete  IL,  was  a  remarkable  person,  and  he  deserved 
a  better  chance  of  success.  He  had  been  trained  for  the 
Papacy  by  his  father,  and  he  showed  his  astuteness  by  the  pains 
which  he  took  to  secure  the  alliance  of  the  Frangipani,  whose 
adhesion  meant  ascendancy  in  Rome.  But  his  Jewish  origin 
was  against  him :  anti-Semitic  feeling  was  less  strong  in  Italy 
than  elsewhere,  but  it  gave  to  his  opponent  an  overwhelming 
ascendancy  in  Europe.  Besides,  Gregory  had  on  his  side  the 
advantage  of  priority  of  election,  and  in  Bernard  of  Clairvaux 
he  found  a  champion  whose  personal  influence  alone  outweighed 
any  claims  which  could  be  advanced  by  Anaclete.  To  complete 
the  drawbacks  which  threw  Anaclete  at  the  outset  on  to  the 
losing  side,  the  Gwelfic  faction  of  the  Normans  deserted  him, 
and  thus  threw  him  on  to  the  mercy  of  Roger  of  Sicily. 
Accordingly,  at  the  Council  of  Rheims,  where  Anaclete  was 
excommunicated  by  Innocent  IL,  England,  France,  and  Spain 
signified  their  assent  through  the  agency  of  Bernard  of  Clair- 
vaux. 

The  schism  was  the  ostensible  pretext  of  two  expeditions 
into  Italy  by  the  Emperor  Lothair,  in  both  of  which  he  showed 
his  incompetence,  and  in  neither  did  he  eflFect  any  solution  of 
the  crisis.  In  the  earlier  expedition  of  1132  he  threw  away  a 
magnificent  opportunity  by  rejecting  the  petition  of  Anaclete  for 
an  impartial  synod,  in  which  Lothair  might  have  played  the 
part  which  Henry  HI.  played  at  Sutri.  Instead  of  acting  as 
arbiter  in  the  struggle,  Lothair  identified  himself  with  the 
interests  of  Innocent  II. ,  allowed  the  Frangipani  to  betray  Rome 
into  his  hands,  and  in  1133  had  himself  crowned  by  the 
Ghibelline  Pope  in  St.  Peter's.  But  the  power  of  Anaclete  in 
the  south  made  it  impossible  for  the  Emperor  to  stay  in  Italy, 
and  soon  after  his  return,  he  was  followed  in  flight  by  the  Pope 
who  had  crowned  him. 

The  second  expedition  of  Lothair  in  1137  was  less  abortive 
than  the  first.     In  the  interval,  circumstances  had  changed  in 


140  A  SHOET  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

his  favour.  He  had  become  reconciled  with  the  Hohenstaufen 
brothers  in  Germany,  while  in  Italy  the  genius  of  Bernard  of 
Clairvaux  had  been  at  work  with  striking  results.  Pisa,  Milan, 
and  North  Italy  threw  themselves  unreservedly  on  to  the  side  of 
Innocent,  and  Roger  of  Apulia  alone  remained  loyal  to  Anaclete. 
Incited  by  Bernard's  invocation,  Lothair  descended  on  Bene- 
vento,  and  subdued  it  in  the  name  of  the  Holy  Roman  Empire. 
Leaving  St.  Bernard  to  convert  Rome  from  its  allegiance  to 
Anaclete,  he  pressed  on  towards  the  South  and  drove  Roger  out 
of  Apulia.  At  this  juncture  Anaclete  died,  and  the  schism 
practically  came  to  an  end.  When,  in  1139,  the  Lateran  Council 
announced  its  close,  Roger  of  Sicily  and  the  Pierleoni  were  the 
only  exceptions  to  the  general  unanimity  in  favour  of  Innocent  II. 
Roger  elected  Victor  IX.  to  carry  on  the  opposition  of  Anaclete, 
but  the  victorious  Ghibellines  treated  him  as  negligible,  and 
excommunicated  his  patron.  The  Pierleoni  were  ignominiously 
bought  oflF,  but  the  Normans  ofifered  battle.  The  episode  which 
followed  was  characteristic  of  the  history  of  the  Italian 
Normans.  Roger's  son  took  Innocent  prisoner;  then  knelt 
before  his  captive  to  impose  upon  him  the  terms  of  a  conqueror. 
Roger  required  his  instant  release  from  the  spiritual  ban,  and 
his  confirmation  of  the  kingdom  of  the  Two  Sicilies.  The  proud 
submission  of  the  Pope  and  the  deferential  dictatorship  of  the 
King  were  the  recurring  incidents  of  a  drama  which  repeats  itself 
intermittently  throughout  medieeval  history.  But  the  occasion 
was  unique ;  that  which  the  Popes  had  dreaded  ever  since  the 
first  coming  of  the  Normans  had  come  to  pass.  Their  ascendancy 
in  South  Italy  was  no  longer  unrivalled,  and  Benevento  alone 
remained  to  them  of  the  rich  dominions  which  had  been  the  pride 
of  their  forefathers. 

But  a  deeper  calamity  was  at  hand,  and,  in  the  face  of  more 
deadly  misfortunes,  the  Popes  had  little  leisure  to  mourn  the 
loss  of  their  ascendancy  in  the  South.  Two  years  after  the 
pact  with  Roger,  Innocent  was  faced  with  an  insignificant 
disturbance,  which  produced  one  of  the  most  momentous  crises 
of  Papal  history.  A  small  provincial  dispute  with  the  offending 
city  of  Tivoli,  and  the  temperate  action  of  Innocent  in  razing 
the  walls  of  the  little  town  instead  of  destroying  it  altogether, 
led  to  an  attack  of  the  Roman  populace  on  the  Pope.  The 
revolt  grew  to  alarming  proportions,  and  reached  its  height  in 
September,  1143,  when  the  death  of  Innocent  diverted  it  into  a 
new  channel.  But  hitherto  there  had  been  nothing  very  dis- 
tinctive or  particularly  ominous  about  the  rebellion,  which 
had  many  a  parallel  in  past  history,  and  showed  no  peculiar 


THE  INVESTITUBE  WAR  141 

features  to  distinguish  it  from  others  of  the  same  kind.  But 
after  the  death  of  the  Pope,  new  forces  joined  themselves  to  the 
old,  and  the  time-honoured  lawlessness  of  Rome  found  a  fresh 
outlet  in  the  new  intellectual  democratic  movement  which 
emanated  from  the  schools  of  Paris. 


CHAPTER  XIV 
THE  REPUBLICAN  MOVEMENT,  a.d.  1122-1179 

MENTAL  activity  has  never  found  a  wider  range,  or  met 
with  a  readier  enthusiasm,  than  in  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury. Thanks  to  the  regeneration  of  the  Papacy, 
Europe  was  spiritually  awake  as  it  had  never  been  before,  and 
any  appeal  to  the  higher  nature  of  man  could  be  sure  of  a 
unique  opportunity. 

"  There  are  diversities  of  gifts  but  the  same  spirit."  The 
same  fervour  which  sent  Raymond  of  Toulouse  to  the  Crusades 
sent  Robert  of  Moleme  into  the  wilds  to  found  the  first  Cister- 
cian monastery.  The  extravagant  ecclesiasticism  of  Bernard  of 
Clairvaux  has  its  counterpart  in  the  revolutionary  daring  of 
Abelard.  Mysticism  and  speculation  sprang  from  the  same 
root ;  the  ardour  of  faith  was  one  with  the  ardour  of  criticism. 
The  universal  quickening  brought  to  the  surface  all  the  con- 
tradictions which  underlay  the  structure  of  mediaeval  society : 
in  the  relentless  light  of  the  new  appeal  to  reason,  half  of  the 
world  found  itself  at  enmity  with  the  other  half,  and  principles 
which  had  hitherto  not  seemed  inconsistent  suddenly  displayed 
themselves  in  the  sharpest  antagonism. 

It  was  only  to  be  expected  that  the  new  spirit  of  inquiry 
should  turn  its  sword  inwards.  The  Papacy,  from  which  it 
largely  emanated,  became  the  object  of  its  attack.  In  creating 
an  efficient  clergy,  Hildebrand  had  unintentionally  armed  a 
body  of  critics,  and  in  placing  ecclesiastical  affairs  in  the  fore- 
front of  European  interest,  he  laid  the  new  Papacy  open  to  the 
full  brunt  of  attack.  The  stronghold  of  the  new  movement  in 
its  intellectual  aspect  was  Paris,  where  scholars  of  all  nations 
and  every  degree  came  together  to  enjoy  the  practice  of  the 
dialectic  method,  which  had  been  revived  by  the  first  of  the 
illustrious  professors  of  Paris,  William  of  Champeaux,  and 
his  disciple  Abelard.  The  freedom  and  unrestraint  which 
characterised  the  informal  discussions  of  the  schools  of  Paris 
naturally  evoked  the  opposition  of  conservative   Churchmen, 

142 


Zy^.r    MAPI.  ITALY  IN  THE  MIDDLE  AGES. 

during  the  Wars  belween 
the  Empire  and  the  Papacy 
:C  1155-1274) 


THE  REPUBLICAN  MOVEMENT  143 

who  hated  the  new  questioning  spirit,  and  suspected  the  whole 
tenor  of  secular  learning.  Foremost  among  them  was  Bernard 
of  Clairvaux — the  "  oracle  of  Europe  " — whose  individual  piety 
and  unusual  gift  of  personality  made  him  the  supreme  influence 
in  Europe.  It  was  he  who  had  put  an  end  to  the  schism  of 
1130,  and  one  Pope  at  least  owed  his  pontificate  entirely  to  the 
fact  that  he  was  his  friend.  He  stood  for  everything  which 
Abelard  lived  to  oppose — tradition,  orthodoxy,  and  the  extreme 
limit  of  sacerdotal  power.  He  was  the  foremost  representative 
of  a  large  class  of  humanity  for  whom  speculation  has  no  charm, 
and  free  discussion  no  attraction.  If  there  was  anyone  whom 
he  hated  worse  than  Abelard  it  was  his  ardent  young  pupil, 
Arnold  of  Brescia,  who  was  destined  to  become  the  political 
exponent  of  his  master's  views.  It  was  Arnold  who  carried  the 
contests  of  the  schools  into  the  region  of  facts  ;  his  career  forms 
the  immediate  link  between  Paris  and  Rome. 

In  Italy,  the  intellectual  movement  took  another  form,  and 
the  philosophical  contests  of  Paris  were  supplanted  by  the  legal 
controversies  of  Bologna.  The  renaissance  of  Roman  Law  began 
even  earlier  than  the  philosophical  movement,  and  the  schools 
of  Pavia  and  Bologna  were  organised  in  the  eleventh  century, 
before  the  schools  of  Paris  had  grouped  themselves  round  their 
teachers.  Throughout  the  Dark  Ages  the  study  of  Roman 
law  had  survived  side  by  side  with  the  early  development  of 
ecclesiastical  Canon  law.  There  was  at  first  no  rivalry  between 
the  two  systems  ;  in  the  contest  of  the  eleventh  century  between 
the  Papacy  and  the  Empire,  both  sides  alike  ransacked  the 
texts  of  ancient  Rome  for  legal  weapons.  Irnerius,  the  famous 
exponent  of  Justinian,  began  his  career  as  the  protege  of  the 
Countess  Matilda ;  but  he  found  no  difficulty  in  afterwards 
obtaining  the  patronage  of  her  opponent,  Henry  V.  His  lectures 
at  Bologna  showed  at  first  neither  Gwelf  nor  Ghibelline  colour, 
and  it  was  not  until  1118,  when  he  took  up  the  cause  of  the 
anti-pope,  that  his  politics  became  identified  with  the  school  of 
law  which  he  professed.  From  that  moment  the  civil  jurists 
be^an  to  interpret  Roman  law  in  the  interests  of  the  Empire, 
while  the  Canonists  became  openly  hostile.  The  legal  contest 
became  merged  in  the  great  European  duel,  and  it  introduced 
new  combatants ;  it  sharpened  the  points  of  the  weapons 
which  on  both  sides  had  become  blunted  with  long  usage.  The 
continual  encounters  of  the  two  systems  increased  the  vigour 
of  buth.  The  civil  law  was  not  allowed  to  outstrip  its  rival,  and 
even  in  their  texts  the  Canonists  recognised  no  defeat.  The 
"Glossaries"   of  the   civilians  were   confronted   first  with  the 


144  A  SHOET  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

"Codes"  of  Ivo  of  Chartres,  and  later  by  the  famous  "Decretum" 
of  Gratian  which  appeared  about  1142. 

The  revival  of  Roman  Jaw,  in  addition  to  the  support  which 
it  gave  to  the  Imperial  principle,  had  a  further  effect  of  immense 
importance  in  the  history  of  papal  Rome.  It  brought  the  past 
once  more  into  vivid  contact  with  the  present.  The  study  of 
the  codes  led  men  back  to  the  study  of  the  civic  life  of  ancient 
Rome.  The  extension  of  the  Caesarean  ideal  produced  a  re- 
action in  favour  of  the  republican  principle.  The  Romans  had 
watched  with  jealous  interest  the  acquisition  of  freedom  by  the 
cities  of  North  Italy  during  the  Investiture  war :  why  should 
Pisa  and  Genoa  be  free  while  Rome  was  in  bondage?  Which  of 
the  Northern  cities  could  base  their  claim  to  republican  liberty 
on  such  a  past  as  that  of  Rome  ?  The  disturbances  connected 
with  Tivoli  grew  into  a  civic  revolution.  How  it  happened — at 
what  moment  the  new  republican  cry  began  to  blend  with  the 
familiar  shouts  of  rival  factions — is  unknown  to  us,  owing  to 
the  obscurity  of  the  annals.  All  that  is  recorded  is,  that  at  a 
given  moment  the  indignant  Romans  hastened  to  the  Capitol 
and  revived  the  Senate. 

The  peculiar  social  conditions  of  civic  Rome  were  mainly 
responsible  for  the  unique  character  of  the  republican  movement. 
For,  unlike  the  Tuscan  and  Lombard  cities,  the  burgher  class 
had  hitherto  been  entirely  insignificant  in  Rome.  All  the  civic 
power,  as  well  as  the  delegated  authority  of  the  Pope,  was  in 
the  hands  of  the  aristocracy,  the  consuls  of  the  city,  and  the 
capitani  of  the  campagna.  The  ordinary  citizen  had  no  political 
status  other  than  that  which  he  derived  from  his  place  in  the 
military  organisation.  The  disabilities  of  the  burgher  class 
were  shared  by  the  lesser  nobility,  and,  as  in  England,  the  two 
classes,  socially  distinct,  came  more  and  more  to  amalgamate 
their  political  interests.  Just  at  the  moment  of  crisis,  in 
September  1143,  Pope  Innocent  died,  and  was  succeeded  by  a 
pupil  of  Abelard,  Celestine  II.,  who  reigned  only  a  few  months. 
His  successor,  Lucius  II.,  tried  in  vain,  with  the  help  of  Roger  of 
Sicily,  to  stem  the  tide  of  Republicanism.  He  appealed  to  the 
uncrowned  Emperor  Conrad  of  Franconia,  who  had  succeeded 
his  rival,  Lothair,  in  1138,  but  the  response  was  non-committal 
and  unsatisfactory.  Conrad  sympathised  with  Lucius,  but  he 
had  no  time  or  energy  to  spare  for  Italy  at  the  moment.  In 
spite  of  his  lukewarmness,  Lucius  laid  siege  to  the  Capitol,  but 
a  blow  on  the  head  from  a  falling  stone  cut  short  his  enterprising 
career,  and  left  his  cause  in  *the  hands  of  a  weak  and  saintly 
disciple   of  Bernard  of  Clairvaux.     The  election  of  the  monk 


THE  REPUBLICAN  MOVEMENT  145 

Eugenius  III.  (1145-1153)  was  the  unaccountable  eflfect  of  St. 
Bernard's  influence,  but  even  his  patron  trembled  for  his  cause 
when  he  heard  of  his  appointment. 

Eugenius  was  consecrated  at  Farfa,  where  he  collected  a 
contingent  of  vassals  to  march  against  Rome.  But  he  was 
half-hearted,  and  after  excommunicating  Jordan  Pierleoni,  who 
had  been  elected  Patricius  of  the  Senate,  the  popular  party 
brought  him  to  terms.  At  Christmas,  1145,  he  signed  a  treaty 
which  pledged  him  to  recognise  the  constitution,  on  condition 
that  the  Patricius  was  removed  and  the  Prefect  replaced.  The 
Senate  was  to  receive  investiture  from  the  Pope,  and  to  rule  in 
accordance  with  the  constitution  recently  drawn  up.  As  far  as 
a  paper  constitution  can  go,  the  scheme  of  1145  was  not  without 
its  merits,  and  it  seeme  I  as  if  a  modus  vivendi  for  the  Pope  and 
the  Senate  had  been  found.  But  the  situation  was  really  im- 
possible, for  Papal  and  Communal  government  were  not  merely 
co-ordinate  systems ;  they  were  also  antagonistic,  and  it  was 
inconceivable  that  they  could  coexist  while  neither  proposed 
to  give  place  to  the  other.  The  old  and  unworthy  jealousy  of 
Rome  for  the  town  of  Tivoli  still  smouldered,  and  Eugenius 
failed  to  satisfy  it  by  the  destruction  of  the  city  walls.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  partisans  of  the  Pope,  the  nobles  and  the 
clergy,  hated  the  Senate,  and  jeered  at  the  forms  of  republican 
government.  Eugenius  was  ultimately  driven  to  escape  to 
France. 

At  the  same  moment,  Arnold  of  Brescia  appeared  in  Rome, 
and  began  to  preach  his  version  of  the  doctrines  of  Abelard. 
The  moment  was  felicitous :  his  preaching  caught  the  ear  of 
Rome,  and  his  words  were  quoted  as  oracles.  Among  his  enemies 
Arnold  was  already  a  marked  man.  He  had  been  condemned 
by  the  Lateran  Synod  of  1139  for  inciting  the  opposition  to  the 
Bishop  of  his  own  city.  He  had  won  notoriety  by  supporting 
Abelard  at  Sens  in  his  scholastic  tournament  against  the  world- 
famed  Bernard.  From  that  moment  the  hostility  of  the  saint 
of  Clairvaux  dogged  the  impetuous  Arnold  with  relentless  per- 
sistence. He  was  first  confined  to  a  monastery,  and  on  his 
release  he  was  expelled  from  Paris.  He  was  hunted  out  of 
Zurich  which  for  a  time  gave  him  refuge,  and  Cardinal  Guido 
of  Bohemia  was  warned  against  him  in  the  strongest  terms. 
"  Arnold  of  Brescia,,  whose  speech  is  honey  but  whose  teaching 
is  poison,  who  bears  the  head  of  a  dove  but  the  sting  of  a 
serpent,  whom  Brescia  drove  forth,  who  is  abhorred  by  Rome, 
banished  by  France,  denounced  by  Germany,  and  whom  Italy 
refuses  to  receive,  is,  it  is  said,  with  you ;  take  care  that  he 

10 


146  A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

does  not  injure  the  respect  due  to  your  office:  to  favour  him 
means  opposition  to  the  commands  of  the  Pope  and  of  God. 

This  is  St.  Bernard's  description  of  the  refugee,  who  appeared 
in  Rome  with  dramatic  suddenness  as  the  apostle  of  the  re- 
publican movement.  In  spite  of  a  certain  semblance  of  order 
and  machinery,  the  Roman  democracy,  as  he  found  it,  was  chaotic 
and  disunited,  pressing  bhndly  towards  an  unforeseen  goal,  and 
entirely  lacking  in  consistency  and  organisation.  It  was  fore- 
doomed to  failure  by  its  association  with  the  dead  past :  founded 
on  a  ruin,  and  shaped  on  an  imaginary  prototype,  it  was  at  the 
best  a  fantastic  castle  in  the  air.  Arnold  of  Brescia  laid  his 
finger  on  the  sentimentality  which  underlay  the  movement  and 
diverted  it  into  the  definite  channel  of  his  own  particular  creed. 
He  seized  upon  the  popular  resentment  of  the  papal  policy,  and 
used  it  as  a  brief  against  the  Gregorian  hierarchy.  He  preached 
against  temporal  power  in  all  its  forms :  the  clergy  were  all  to 
be  poor— all  to  be  equal ;  the  Church  was  to  divest  herself  both 
of  territorial  and  of  poUtical  rights  and  interests. 

In  1148  Eugenius  came  back  to  Italy  and  excommunicated 
Arnold.  In  retaUation,  the  Romans,  turning  a  deaf  ear  to  St. 
Bernards  exhortations,  appealed  to  Conrad,  but  they  were  no 
more  successful  in  that  quarter  than  the  Pope  had  been.  Conrad 
was  not  statesm-an  enough  to  realise  that,  as  arbiter  between  the 
two  parties,  he  was  master  of  the  situation.  He  allowed  him- 
self to  be  detained  in  Germany  till  1151,  when  his  death  saved 
him  the  trouble  of  making  up  his  mind.  He  was  succeeded  by 
his  greater  brother,  Frederick,  whose  accession  was  hailed  with 
delight  by  the  Commune.  But  the  Romans  were  doomed  to  dis- 
appointment. With  a  strange  mental  confusicn  between  the 
catchwords  of  Csesarean  despotism  and  civic  democracy,  they 
informed  Frederick  that  he  was  the  fountain  of  law  and  the 
supreme  lawgiver,  but  he  must  be  careful  not  to  overlook  the 
fact  that  his  power  emanated  from  the  Roman  people  and  their 
representative,  the  Senate.  Frederick,  in  reply,  laughed  at  the 
pretensions  of  the  Senate  and  made  a  treaty  with  Eugenius, 
promising  to  maintain  the  Dominium  Temporale  in  return  for 
his  Imperial  Coronation.  In  the  same  year  (1153)  Eugenius  III. 
died  at  Tivoli,  leaving  the  pontificate  to  Anastasius  IV.,  who 
lived  peaceably  with  the  Senate  for  a  few  months,  then  followed 
his  predecessor  to  the  grave. 

The  pontificate  which  followed  restored  to  papal  history  the 
lustre  and  distinction  which  the  preceding  generation  had  lacked. 
In  Hadrian  IV.  we  have  a  master-mind  once  more  at  the  head 
of  afi'airs.     England  has  every  reason  to  be  proud  of  the  solitaiy 


THE  REPUBLICAN  MOVEMENT  147 

English  Pope :  his  sanity,  his  inborn  ruling  instinct,  and  his 
robust  methods  in  diplomacy  stamp  him  as  the  traditional 
Englishman  of  the  best  type.  And  yet,  as  an  individual, 
Hadrian  owed  very  little  to  his  native  land.  The  son  of  a  poor 
priest  at  St.  Albans,  Nicholas  Breakspere  left  home  in  his  boy- 
hood, and  begged  his  way  to  France,  where  he  eventually  became 
Prior  of  St.  Rufus'  near  Aries.  He  is  described  as  attractive, 
cultured,  and  eloquent,  evidently  one  born  for  success  without 
much  struggle  in  attaining  it. 

As  Pope,  Hadrian  abandoned  the  policy  of  compromise  with 
the  Senate.  He  saw  at  once  that  the  hollow  friendship  between 
irreconcilables  was  not  worth  the  cost  of  preserving  it.  He 
therefore  appealed  to  Frederick  for  the  expulsion  of  Arnold  of 
Brescia,  not  as  a  suppliant,  but  as  one  who  claimed  the  fulfil- 
ment of  an  undisputed  obligation.  The  Commune,  in  retalia- 
tion, appealed  to  William  of  Sicily,  who  ravaged  Benevento  and 
Latium  in  the  name  of  the  anti-clerical  party.  The  assassina- 
tion of  a  Cardinal  in  the  Via  Sacra  gave  Hadrian  the  opportunity 
ior  which  he  had  been  waiting.  He  suddenly  paralysed  the 
forces  of  democracy  by  laying  the  city  under  an  interdict. 
Easter  was  approaching,  and  the  suspension  of  the  Sacraments 
produced  a  panic  which  swept  the  Republican  movement  away. 
When  the  fourth  day  of  the  Holy  Week  passed  without  Mass, 
the  people  rose  against  the  Senate  in  a  frenzy  of  religious 
hatred.  Hadrian  refused  to  move  until  they  went  one  step 
further,  and  only  after  the  banishment  of  Arnold  of  Brescia, 
after  nine  years  of  leadership  in  the  city,  was  the  dreaded 
interdict  removed. 

Thus,  in  1155,  when  Frederick  Hohenstaufen  set  out  for  his 
first  expedition  to  Rome,  Hadrian  IV.  seemed  to  be  in  a  strong 
position.  It  was  well  for  the  Papacy  that  it  was  so,  for  the 
situation  showed  clear  signs  of  trouble  to  come.  Frederick 
Barbarossa,  the  hero  of  German  history,  was  the  strongest  of  the 
great  Emperors.  His  vision  of  the  Empire  was  as  lofty  as  Hilde- 
brand's  conception  of  the  Papacy :  he  was  mighty  in  war  and 
preeminent  in  leadership.  His  first  meeting  with  Hadrian  in- 
dicated the  attitude  which  he  intended  to  adopt  towards  the 
Papacy.  He  came  to  Nepi,  swearing  to  keep  the  peace  newly 
ratified  at  Constance.  He  surrendered  Arnold  of  Brescia  who 
had  fled  to  him  for  protection.  But  he  withheld  the  customary 
act  of  homage  which  his  predecessors  had  never  failed  to  yield ; 
he  would  confer  benefits  on  the  Pope,  but  he  would  not  hold 
his  stirrup ;  he  would  embrace  him  as  Father  in  God,  but  he 
would  not  serve  him  as  his  man.      The  consternation  which 


148  A  SHOET  HISTOBY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

this  attitude  produced  among  his  followers  obliged  him  after- 
wards to  submit,  but  the  incident  does  not  lose  its  significance 

thereby.  Pit,       uv 

At  Sutri  Frederick  was  met  by  the  envoys  of  the  Republic, 
which  was  determined  to  die  hard.     The  Emperor  received  their 
loyal  protests  with  cold  contempt,  and  answered  their  pompous 
eloquence  with  curt  commonsense.     Otto  of  Freising  gives  the 
substance  of  Frederick's  speech:    "Wilt  thou  know  where  the 
ancient  glory  of  thy  Rome,  the  dignified  severity  of  thy  Senate 
the  valiant  chastity  of  knighthood,  the  tactics  of  the  camp  and 
invincible  military  courage  have   gone?      All   are   now   found 
among  us  Germans ;  all  have  been  transmitted  to  us  with  the 
Empire.     We  are  thy  consuls,  with  us  is  thy  Senate ;  thy  legions 
are  here."     It  needed  only  Frederick's  occupation  of  the  Leonma 
and  his  Coronation  in  June  of  the  same  year  to  revive  the  dying 
flame  of  the  democratic  movement.     Roused  to  fury  by  their 
exclusion  from   the  ceremony  in  St.  Peter's,  the  Roman  mob 
attacked  the  Imperial  camp,  possibly  with  the  hope  of  releasing 
their  hero  Arnold  from  the  Emperor's  custody.     All  day  long 
the  struggle  lasted  on  the  bridge  of  St.  Angelo,  and  the  vigour  of 
the  Republic  requires  no  stronger  proof  than  is  afforded  by  its 
spirited  defence,  which  finally  forced  Frederick  to  retire  without 
so  much  as  entering  the  city  proper.     The  victory  had  not  been 
won  without  cost.     A  thousand   Romans   had   been   killed   or 
drowned,  and  two  hundred  more  were  prisoners  in  the  Imperial 
camp.     The  Pope  pleaded  for  their  release,  but  their  fellow- 
citizens  refused  to  abandon  the  struggle.     Victory  cost  them 
also  the  life  of  Arnold  of  Brescia.     His  execution  darkens  the 
career  of  Frederick  Barbarossa,  but  it  is  neither  remarkable 
nor  without  justification.      While  Arnold  lived   the   spirit   of 
Roman  democracy  had  its  expression  in  his  winged  words,  and 
gained  impetus  from  the  force  of  his  personality.     With  him 
died  the  Roman  Republic,  with  all  its  pathetic  aspirations,  its 
ludicrLUS   pretension,   and   its   genuine  seeking  after  progress. 
An  estimate  of  Arnold  of  Brescia  must  necessarily  be  compara- 
tive    He  is  the  first  of  the  series  of  hero-rebels  who   have 
sacrificed  their  lives  for  the  freedom  of  Italy.     As  such  he  forms 
a  connecting  link  between  the  old  and  the  new— not,  like  Hilde- 
brand,  between  the  two  eras  of  the  Middle  Ages,  but  between 
the  ancient  and  modern  world.     In  one  aspect,  he  is  the  pro- 
duct of  the  Investiture  struggle— the  opponent  of  hierarchical 
power— and  in  another,  he  is  the  forerunner  of  modern  Italy.    In 
many  respects  he  compares  favourably  with  those  who  took  up 
the  cause  in  later  generations.     He  was  more  sane  than  Savona- 


THE  EEPUBLICAN  MOVEMENT  149 

rola,  more  patriotic  than  Rienzi,  and  broader  and  clearer  in  his 
aims  than  Porcaro.  There  was  real  ground  for  the  instinct 
which  coupled  his  name  with  the  liberal  movement  of  1862 — 

Viva  il  papa,  non  re  ! 
Viva  Arnoldo  da  Brescia, 
Viva  il  Clero  liberale  ! ' 

By  the  death  of  its  leading  spirit  the  Roman  Republic  waB 
crushed,  never  to  be  revived  with  the  same  loftiness  of  purpose 
or  the  same  purity  of  aim.  Before  long  Frederick  had  reason  to 
repent  of  his  victory  :  in  the  spirit  of  Roman  freedom  he  had 
overthrown  the  enemy  of  the  Pope  rather  than  his  own.  He 
had  been  fighting  the  battles  of  the  Papacy  as  surely  as  Pepin 
or  Charles,  with  much  less  advantage  to  himself.  Moreover,  his 
campaign  in  Italy  had  been  peculiarly  abortive  :  after  wander- 
ing aimlessly  in  the  south,  reclaiming  the  allegiance  of  the 
Campagna,  the  ravages  of  fever  caused  him  to  hurry  north, 
without  striking  a  blow  against  Sicily  or  retaliating  on  Rome. 
He  took  leave  of  Hadrian  at  Tivoli,  leaving  the  Roman  prisoners 
in  his  hands,  with  the  understanding  that  the  Pope  should  com- 
plete the  campaign  in  their  joint  interests  against  William  of 
Sicily.  But  Hadrian  was  not  the  man  to  sacrifice  the  Papacy  in 
the  interests  of  the  Empire,  and  as  soon  as  Frederick  was  out  of 
sight,  he  showed  his  intention  to  play  his  own  hand.  After  a 
vain  endeavour  to  stir  up  a  revolt  against  William  in  Apulia,  he 
first  ofi'ended  Frederick  by  allying  himself  with  the  Greeks,  in 
contradiction  of  the  terms  of  the  Treaty  of  Constance  ;  he  then 
further  roused  the  Imperial  indignation  by  coming  to  terms  with 
the  Duke  of  Sicily,  and  investing  him  with  Sicily,  Apulia  and 
Capua  as  fiefs  of  the  Papacy.  The  alliance  with  William  was 
the  stepping-stone  to  peace  with  Rome :  what  remained  of  the 
Republican  party  was  won  over  by  the  gold  and  the  threats  of 
Sicily — a  further  cause  of  irritation  to  Frederick,  who  resented 
his  own  exclusion  from  the  terms  of  the  peace. 

There  were  further  causes  which  contributed  to  the  accumu- 
lation of  grievances.  The  various  points  at  issue  concerning 
Matilda's  legacy  were  still  unsettled  :  the  Investiture  contest  had 
left  many  debatealile  problems  behind  it.  The  alliance  with 
Sicily  ba  I  infringed  Imperial  rights  :  the  peace  with  Rome  was, 
in  some  unknown  particulars  one-sided.  There  was,  moreover, 
the  eternal  and  inevitable  antagonism  between  a  strong  Emperor 
and   a  strong  Pope,  and  the  conflicting  absolutism  of  the  two 

^  Greg.,  vol.  iv.,  part  ij. 


150  A  SHOET  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

theories  which  they  represented.  But  the  immediate  cause  of 
dispute  was  a  verbal  indiscretion  in  a  letter  of  protest  from 
Hadrian,  occasioned  by  the  robbery  of  a  Swedish  Bishop  by 
some  Burgundian  knights.  The  Pope  wrote  a  strong  document, 
reminding  Frederick  that  he  owed  his  Empire  to  the  Papacy,  and 
making  use  in  an  unguarded  moment  of  the  technical  word, 
"Beneficium,"  or  fief,  to  define  the  position  in  which  the  Em- 
pire stood  to  the  Papacy.  The  Cardinal  legates,  who  bore  the 
document,  narrowly  escaped  death,  and  Cardinal  Roland — the 
future  Alexander  III. — fearlessly  undertook  its  defence,  asking 
with  poignant  logic  "  If  not  from  the  Pope,  from  whom  does  he 
(the  Emperor)  hold  his  Empire?  "  The  answer,  expressed  in  an 
indignant  Imperial  manifesto,  was — "  From  God  alone  our  king- 
dom and  Empire  emanates  ".  The  German  party  among  the 
Cardinals  forced  Hadrian  to  apologise,  and  a  subsequent  letter 
explained  that  the  word  "  Beneficium  "  had  been  used  in  a 
general  and  not  a  legal  sense.  But  it  was  too  late,  for  Fred- 
erick had  meanwhile  prepared  an  expedition  against  Italy,  and 
Milan  had  already  surrendered.  At  the  Diet  of  Roncaglia  in 
1158  the  jurists  of  Bologna  defined  the  Imperial  power  in  terms 
of  Justinian  absolutism,  which  caused  the  towns  and  the  Popes 
to  draw  together  in  resistance.  Their  alliance  was  still  further 
cemented  by  the  attempt  of  Frederick  to  put  juridical  theory 
into  practice  in  demanding  feudal  dues  from  the  whole  of  Italy. 
Loud  was  the  outcry  throughout  the  land,  and  loudest  was  the 
remonstrance  of  the  Pope,  who  pleaded  for  ecclesiastical  liberty 
in  all  secular  as  well  as  religious  things.  Hadrian  realised  that 
all  the  results  of  Hildebrand's  efi"orts  were  at  stake,  and  his  un- 
compromising attitude  of  resistance  does  credit  to  his  character 
and  statesmanship.  But  in  focussing  the  quarrel  on  the  ques- 
tion of  temporal  power,  he  unconsciously  suggested  an  alliance 
between  the  Imperial  party  and  the  survivors  of  the  Republican 
movement.  Now  was  the  moment  for  Frederick  to  regret  the 
execution  of  the  great  republican,  and  when  he  sought  for 
counter-arguments  to  hurl  against  the  papal  protest,  he  found 
them  in  the  words  of  Arnold  of  Brescia.  When  he  announced 
that  all  Church  property  was  the  gift  of  kings,  and  that  Bishops 
owed  feudal  obligations  like  other  vassals,  the  Arnoldists  ap- 
plauded him.  In  answer  to  the  Pope's  claim  to  have  sole 
authority  in  the  city  of  Rome,  Frederick  replied  :  "  Since  by 
the  will  of  God,  I  am  and  call  myself  Roman  Emperor,  I  should 
only  bear  an  unmeaning  title  did  I  allow  the  sovereignty  over  the 
city  of  Rome  to  pass  out  of  my  hands  ".  His  answer  found  an 
eoho  in  the  Senate,  which  sprang  to  life  again  at  the  revival  of 


THE  EEPUBLICAN  MOVEMENT  151 

its  doctrines.  Consequently,  the  year  1159  saw  an  alliance 
between  the  Emperor  and  the  Romans,  who  had  stood  face  to 
face  in  implacable  hostility,  across  the  dead  body  of  Arnold, 
less  than  four  years  before. 

Hadrian  was  spared  the  necessity  of  confronting  the  new 
situation,  for  he  died  soon  after  the  alliance  was  formed.  His 
failure  to  complete  the  destruction  of  the  Senate  testifies  rather 
to  the  surprising  stability  of  the  Republican  movement  than  to 
the  inadequacy  of  his  methods.  He  had  steered  the  papal  for- 
tunes faithfully  and  skilfully  through  a  crisis,  and  unlike  other 
men  who  won  their  way  to  the  Papacy  from  the  lowest  rank  of 
society  he  spent  himself  as  Pope  in  disinterested  self-sacrifice. 
In  fortifying  papal  cities  and  in  patronising  the  provincial  no- 
bility he  had  laboured  for  the  future,  and  his  plaint,  which  is 
recorded  by  his  fellow-Englishman,  John  of  Salisbury,  is  a 
genuine  piece  of  autobiography  :  "  Oh  that  I  had  never  left  my 
native  land  England,  or  the  convent  of  St.  Rufus.  Is  there  else- 
where in  the  world  a  man  so  miserable  as  the  Pope  ?  I  have 
found  so  much  hardship  on  the  papal  throne  that  all  the  bitter- 
ness of  my  past  life  seems  sweet  in  comparison." 

The  death  of  Hadrian  was  followed  by  a  schism,  with  its 
usual  undinnified  accompaniments.  The  first  Pope  to  be  pro- 
claimed was  Roland  of  Sienna,  who  as  Alexander  III.  stands  out 
among  mediaeval  Popes  as  one  of  the  gro^ip  upon  whom  the 
mantle  of  Gregory  VII.  had  fallen.  The  pontifical  robe  was 
literally  torn  from  his  shoulders  by  Cardinal  Octavian,  who  was 
in  turn  divested  of  it  by  a  supporter  of  Roland's.  Another 
mantle  was,  however,  produced  by  Octavian 's  chaplain,  and  the 
would-be  Pope  hurriedly  decked  himself  with  it,  spoiling  its 
solemn  effect,  however,  by  putting  it  on  inside  out.  Cardinal 
Octavian,  of  the  House  of  Crescentius,  was  the  head  of  the 
German  party  in  Rome,  and  therefore  sure  of  Frederick's 
support.  Moreover,  he  was  good-looking,  generous,  and  popular 
with  the  lower  clergy  and  the  democracy.  But  he  was  over- 
shadowed by  the  higher  qualities  of  his  rival,  who  had  on  his 
siue  the  allegiance  of  the  higher  clergy,  and  the  alliance  of  the 
Lombard  towns  and  of  Sicily.  Roland  was  consecrated  Alexander 
III.  at  Ninfa  in  September,  1159,  and  in  October,  Octavian  took 
the  name  of  Victor  IV.  at  the  adjacent  monastery  of  Farfa.  In 
1160,  Frederick,  as  it  was  expected,  confirmed  Victor  IV.  at  the 
Council  of  Pavia.  Alexander,  from  his  headquarters  at  Anagni, 
declared  war  in  the  traditional  manner  by  excommunicating 
both  the  Emperor  and  the  Pope  of  his  choice. 

But  neither  Frederick  nor  Victor  was  seriously  affected  by 


152  A  SHOET  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

the  fulmination.  The  Emperor  was  engaged  in  his  momentous 
campaign  against  the  Lombard  cities,  and  his  prot6g6  was  with 
him.  In  their  absence  Alexander  managed  to  gain  a  strong 
position  in  the  south  and  the  elements  of  a  party  in  Rorne.  But 
Frederick's  victories  of  1161  turned  the  tide,  and  in  January, 
1162,  Alexander  was  obliged  to  turn  to  the  last  resort  of  a 
harassed  pontiff— flight  to  France.  Frederick  meanwhile  com- 
pleted his  Lombard  conquests  by  the  destruction  of  Milan,  and 
carried  Victor  IV.  with  him  to  Germany.  But  Victor  was  a 
failure  in  Germany,  his  southern  graces  failed  to  charm  the 
Teutonic  people  or  to  compensate  for  the  weakness  of  his  case. 
Finding  him  useless,  Frederick  sent  him  back  to  Italy  with 
Rainold  of  Cologne  as  an  escort.  Soon  after  his  return,  he  died 
and  was  succeeded  as  anti-pope  by  Paschalis  HI.,  the  nominee 
of  Rainold.  The  part  of  anti-pope  was  a  difficult  one  to  play, 
and  it  was  very  seldom  filled  conspicuously.  The  career  of 
Paschalis  HI.  was  as  abortive  as  that  of  his  predecessor  Victor 
and  his  successor  Callixtus.  The  energy  of  Alexander  stands 
out  in  sharp  contrast  to  the  ineSiciency  of  his  rivals.  Rome 
gradually  veered  round  again,  and  in  1165  the  position  of 
Alexander  seemed  assured.  But  early  in  the  next  year,  the 
news  of  a  great  German  victory  at  Monte  Porzio  revived  the 
consternation  in  the  city.  This  time  it  was  no  dilatory  skirmish, 
but  a  serious  German  invasion.  At  the  news  of  Frederick's 
advance  on  the  city,  the  Pope  wept  and  took  refuge  in  the 
Colosseum.  A  successful  attack  on  St.  Peter's  brought  the 
Romans  to  terms  with  Frederick.  The  Senate  had  not  forgotten 
the  Emperor's  former  goodwill  towards  the  republican  party  and 
thankfully  accepted  Imperial  investiture.  Alexander,  finding 
himself  faced  by  the  same  combination  which  had  overwhelmed 
Hadrian,  fled  for  his  life.  He  was  last  seen  at  Circe  in  the 
disguise  of  a  pilgrim,  whence  he  fled  to  Benevento  and  after- 
wards to  Tusculum. 

Everything  seemed  to  lie  at  the  mercy  of  Barbarossa,  but 
with  dramatic  suddenness,  which  is  characteristic  of  the  times, 
the  situation  was  reversed  by  an  epidemic  of  malaria.  The 
heroes  of  the  invincible  army  were  struck  down  with  terrible 
rapidity,  and  Rome  itself  was  decimated.  Thomas  of  Canterbury, 
now  the  foremost  man  in  England,  wrote  to  congratulate 
Alexander  on  "the  destruction  of  Sennacherib's  host".  But 
with  wonderful  tenacity,  Frederick  resolutely  prolonged  his 
campaign  in  the  north.  In  spite  of  the  Emperor's  successes 
against  the  cities,  the  wisdom  of  Alexander  held  fast  to  the 
S|,lliance  of  the  Papacy  with  the  spirit  of  civic  freedom.     It  wag 


THE  REPUBLICAN  MOVEMENT  163 

a  sure  path  to  victory,  for  it  was  based  on  the  principle  to  which, 
more  than  to  any  other,  the  Papacy  has  owed  its  stabiHty. 
Emancipation  was  the  keynote  of  the  new  age — the  idea  in  the 
air,  with  the  inevitable  sanction  of  the  future.  To  identify  it 
with  the  papal  fortunes — to  capture  it,  and  adapt  it  to  the  papal 
idea — was  the  policy  of  Alexander,  in  which  he  was  followed  by 
all  the  successful  Popes  of  all  the  ages.  It  often  demanded  an 
infinity  of  patience,  for  the  forces  of  established  custom  die 
hard,  and  the  new  idea  wins  its  way  very  slowly.  Alexander 
had  to  watch  the  hero-Emperor  win  his  cycle  of  victories  before 
the  great  defeat  of  Legnano  assured  for  ever  the  freedom  of  the 
Lombard  cities. 

Meanwhile,  Alexander  had  wandered  from  place  to  place  in 
the  south,  reaping  some  advantages,  but  on  the  whole  playing  an 
apparently  losing  game.  For  the  first  time  since  the  days  of 
St.  Gregory,  affairs  connected  with  England  appear  in  the  fore- 
front of  papal  policy.  The  quarrel  between  Henry  II.  and 
Thomas  Becket  was  now  at  its  height,  and  the  gold  of  the  royal 
coffers  was  poured  into  Rome  in  the  vain  hope  of  conciliating  the 
Pope.  Harassed  as  he  was  on  all  sides,  Alexander  refused  for  a 
moment  to  lower  his  standard  to  meet  Henry's  convenience.  He 
recognised  in  the  English  King  an  antagonist  who  could  conceiv- 
ably be  crushed  at  a  blow,  but  never  bent  from  his  purpose  by 
conciliatory  methods.  When  in  1170  he  was  at  Tusculum,  hard 
pressed  by  the  Emperor's  vicegerent.  Christian  of  Mainz,  he  heard 
of  the  murder  of  Becket  in  Canterbury  Cathedral.  The  effect  of 
the  English  King's  act  of  sacrilege  grew  more  sharply  defined 
when  the  next  phase  of  the  contest  began.  At  the  moment, 
Alexander  bewailed  the  loss  of  a  trusty  servant  without  realising 
that  the  influence  of  Thomas  of  Canterbury  was  greater  in  his 
"  martyrdom  "  than  in  his  life.  Every  pilgrim  who  took  the  road 
through  the  Kentish  byways,  "  the  holy  blissful  martyr  for  to 
seek,"  in  the  course  of  the  next  three  hundred  years,  recalled  the 
iniquity  and  the  humiliation  of  the  English  King  who  had  dared 
to  oppose  the  will  of  St.  Peter. 

The  victory  of  Legnano  was  sealed  by  the  peace  of  Venice. 
The  final  settlement  was,  however,  preceded  by  a  secret  treaty, 
framed  at  Anagni,  between  the  Pope  and  the  Emperor,  in  which 
the  Emperor  undertook  to  concede  all  the  privileges  which  he  had 
denied  to  Hadrian  in  return  for  the  removal  of  the  ban.  The 
allied  cities  had  good  reason  to  suspect  treachery,  but  Alexander 
kept  faith  with  them  at  Venice,  where  the  envoys  of  the  cities 
appeared  for  the  first  time  beside  the  Pope  and  the  Emperor,  at 
the  first  international  Congress  of  European  history.     But  the 


154  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

Peace  of  Venice  was,  of  course,  the  triumph  of  Alexander.  Calixtus 
was  deposed,  and  the  Patrimony  restored.  Frederick's  claims 
were  recognised  in  Spoleto,  Ancona,  and  Romagna,  and  the  cities 
were  granted  a  six  years'  truce,  during  which  their  future  inde- 
pendence was  granted. 

What  had  become  of  the  Roman  Republic?  A  clause  in  the 
treaty,  of  little  apparent  importance,  gave  it  its  coup  de  grace. 
Frederick  abandoned  his  claim  to  appoint  the  city  Prefect  and  thus 
left  the  Pope  without  a  rival  in  his  sovereignty  in  the  city.  The 
Senate  could  not  stand  alone ;  its  independent  power  had  fallen 
with  Arnold  of  Brc  scia ;  after  the  peace  of  Venice  it  ceased  to  be 
more  than  one  of  the  elements  of  disorder  of  which  the  life  of 
civic  Rome  was  composed.  We  are  reminded  of  its  existence  in 
the  survival  of  strange  decorative  offices  in  the  pageantry  of  the 
Renaissance,  and  twice  again  the  cry  of  liberty  is  heard  above 
the  chants  of  the  clergy  and  the  war-cries  of  the  noble  factions, 
though  never  with  the  same  ring  of  sincerity  and  strength. 
Roman  democracy  was  a  lost  ideal  and  civic  freedom  was  never 
attained ;  but  the  Papacy  lost  as  much  as  it  gained  from  its  vic- 
tory ill  the  struggle  against  a  spirit  which  once  was  real  and  a 
cause  which  was  not  ignoble. 


CHAPTER  XV 

CONSOLIDATION    OF    PAPAL     MONARCHY:     THE    EPOCH    OF 
INNOCENT  IIL,  a.d.  1179-1217 

IN  spite  of  the  Peace  of  Venice,  the  Papacy  was  still  weak 
during  the  last  years  of  Alexander  III.  The  Rome  to 
which  he  returned  in  triumph  in  1179  showed  a  bewildering 
contempt  for  the  settlement  of  the  Emperor,  the  Pope,  and  the 
cities.  The  Landgraves  of  Viterbo  refused  to  abide  by  the 
Emperor's  decision,  and  created  a  new  anti-pope  in  spite  of  him. 
The  Lateran  Council  of  1179  confirmed  the  freedom  of  the 
Church,  but  until  his  death  in  1181,  Alexander  was  absorbed  in 
petty  wars  in  the  ecclesiastical  territory.  His  death  did  not 
improve  matters.  He  was  succeeded  by  three  insignificant 
Popes,  who  lived  and  died  in  exile.  Lucius  III.  (1181-1185) 
endured  the  hostility  of  the  Romans,  and  called  in  Christian  of 
Mainz  to  deliver  Tusculum,  which  was  the  object  of  attack. 
The  warrior-Archbishop  died  like  a  hero  before  the  walls  of 
Tusculum,  and  Lucius  fled  to  Frederick  at  Verona.  This,  how- 
ever, did  not  mend  his  fortunes,  for  he  quarrelled  with  Barbarossa 
over  the  question  of  his  son's  coronation,  and  died  in  the  hostile 
Emperor's  camp.  Urban  III.  (1185-1187)  was  equally  unfor- 
tunate; he  stayed  at  Verona,  and  continued  to  quarrel  with 
Frederick — a  quarrel  which  gained  added  bitterness  when  the 
Emperor  married  his  son  Henry  to  Constance,  the  heiress  of 
Sicily.  This  was  an  intolerable  blow  to  the  Papacy,  for  the 
popes  had  grown  accustomed  to  using  Sicily  as  a  buffer  between 
the  Papacy  and  the  Empire.  Urban  therefore  refused  to  crown 
Henry,  who  was  promptly  sent  against  Rome  by  his  father. 

In  1187  came  the  news  of  the  recapture  of  Jerusalem,  which 
ha  1  been  liberated  by  the  first  Crusaders  under  Urban  II.  At 
the  same  moment.  Urban  III.  died  and  was  succeeded  by  the  old 
and  equable  Gregory  VIII.  From  that  moment  the  eyes  of 
Christendom  turned  once  more  towards  the  East.  Gregory  VIII. 
thoiieht  of  nothing  else  than  the  recapture  of  Jerusalem,  and 
with  that  end  in  view  he  patched  up  a  peace  with  Henry.  His 
successor,  Clement  III.,  broke  through  the  fatal  spell  of  weakness 

155 


156  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

by  which  the  Papacy  had  been  overcast.  He  was  a  man  of 
energy  and  decision ;  he  saw  that  the  sacrifice  of  Tusculum  was 
necessary  to  the  restoration  of  peace  with  Rome,  and  he  did  not 
hesitate  to  carry  it  through,  together  with  the  surrender  of  many 
papal  privileges  which  weaker  Popes  had  struggled  to  retain. 
The  rest  of  his  energies  were  devoted  to  the  new  crusade,  which 
was  planned  on  a  larger  and  more  splendid  scale  than  the  two 
earlier  expeditions.  It  was  the  heyday  of  chivalry  and  at  the  head 
of  the  enterprise  were  three  of  the  most  conspicuous  of  mediseval 
heroes,  Frederick  Barbarossa,  Richard  Coeur  de  Lion,  and  Philip 
Augustus.  But  the  prestige  of  the  Papacy  was  far  less  marked 
than  in  the  time  of  Urban  IL  Richard  of  England,  during  his 
six  months'  visit  to  Tancred  of  Sicily,  refused  to  visit  Rome  on 
the  ground  that  there  was  nothing  to  be  found  there  but  avarice 
and  corruption. 

In  June,  1190,  came  the  news  of  the  death  of  Frederick  on 
his  way  to  Palestine.  The  hero-Emperor  had  been  hated  in 
Italy  as  enthusiastically  as  he  was  idolised  in  Germany.  And 
yet  Italian  history  owes  more  to  his  hostility  than  to  the  benefits 
conferred  by  friendly  Emperors,  for  his  wars  against  the  Northern 
cities  had  stimulated  their  freedom  and  endowed  them  with  a 
stability  which  is  unparalleled  in  European  history. 

The  son  of  Frederick  was  a  lesser  man  than  his  father,  ex- 
celling him  in"  barbarity  and  obstinacy,  and  substituting  a 
cold  and  cruel  daring  for  the  splendid  military  qualities  of 
Barbarossa.  Immediately  on  his  accession^  Henry  set  out  for 
Rome,  but  between  him  and  the  new  Pope  strained  relations  had 
already  arisen.  Celestine  III.,  who  succeeded  Clement  in  1191, 
proved  no  match  for  the  cunning  of  the  Emperor-elect.  More- 
over, he  had  given  Henry  a  grievance  by  confirming  the  usurper 
Tancred  in  the  kingdom  of  Sicily,  to  which  Henry's  wife  was 
the  legitimate  claimant.  Celestine,  therefore,  awaited  in  trepi- 
dation Henry's  arrival  in  Rome,  and  delayed  his  own  consecra- 
tion in  the  hope  of  postponing  the  coronation  until  a  more 
favourable  moment.  This  manoeuvre  was,  however,  frustrated  by 
Henry's  skill  in  ingratiating  himself  with  the  Roman  people,  at 
the  expense  of  the  scapegoat  city  of  Tusculum.  Urged  by  the 
Senate,  the  Pope  was  obliged  to  hurry  on  both  the  ceremonies ; 
two  days  after  Henry's  consecration,  Tusculum,  the  home  of  the 
Catos,  and  the  cradle  of  the  Theophylacts,  was  razed  to  the 
ground. 

The  reign  of  Henry  VI.  was  fraught  with  evil  for  the  Papacy. 
The  Emperor's  successes  against  Tancred  revived  the  night- 
mare of  union  between  Germany  and  Sicily.     Things  were  no 


CONSOLIDATION  OF  PAPAL  MONABCHY       157 

better  within  the  Patrimony.  Henry  sprinkled  his  German 
officials  throughout  Italy  and  carved  duchies  for  his  followers 
without  scruple  or  regard  for  the  Pope.  In  Rome  itself,  two 
quasi-popular  revolutions  in  1191  and  1197  changed  the  form  of 
the  Senate  tir^t  into  a  Presidency  under  a  Summus  Senator,  and 
afterwards  into  an  oligarchy  composed  of  fifty- six  captains. 
Celestine  was  old  and  weary,  and  Henry's  barbarous  Sicilian 
victories  in  1196  closed  his  days  in  tragedy.  The  most  unat- 
tractive of  mediEeval  Emperors  died  in  1197,  followed  to  the 
grave  within  a  few  months  by  the  Pope  whom  he  had  many 
times  wronged. 

With  the  death  of  Celestine  III.  papal  history  enters  on  its 
second  brilliant  epoch  of  ascendancy  through  the  dominating 
qualities  of  an  outstanding  personality.  The  talents  of  Innocent 
III.  are  only  surpassed  among  the  makers  of  the  Papacy  by  the 
genius  of  Gregory  VII.,  and  judged  by  the  standard  of  actual 
achievement  the  pontificate  of  Innocent  stands  alone.  He 
found  the  Papacy  in  1198  weak  and  despised,  with  nothing  but  a 
magnificent  tradition  and  the  memory  of  great  moments  in  the 
past  to  recall  the  enthusiasm  of  Christendom  for  the  unity  of  the 
spiritual  Empire.  By  the  end  of  his  pontificate  he  had  restored 
the  papal  power  to  its  utmost  limits,  and  he  left  it  organised, 
legalised,  controlling  and  controlled,  to  endure  until  a  third 
great  name  should  stand  like  a  sentinel  between  its  culmination 
and  decline. 

Innocent  was  thirty-seven  years  old  when  as  Cardinal  Lothar 
he  became  a  candidate  for  the  Papacy.  He  belonged  to  the  im- 
portant family  of  the  Dei  Conti,  and  inherited,  in  addition  to 
the  influence  of  an  ancient  ruling  family,  the  feuds  and  tradi- 
tions characteristic  of  the  Roman  nobility.  He  had  been 
brought  up  under  the  influence  of  the  great  legal  revival,  and 
his  education  in  Paris  and  Bologna  had  given  him  the  best 
possible  preparation  for  the  special  work  which  it  was  his  as 
Pope  to  accomplish.  He  started  with  three  qualities  in  common 
with  Hildebrand,  with  whom  it  is  natural  to  compare  him :  his 
ambition,  his  energy,  and  his  faith  in  his  ideal.  The  cause  of 
his  greater  immediate  success,  and  also  of  the  inferior  place 
which  he  holds  in  world-history,  was  his  more  limited  vision. 
His  theories  were  not  less  absolute  than  those  of  Hildebrand, 
but  he  showed  more  prudence  and  diplomacy  in  working  them 
out.  He  could  not  help  detecting  the  pitfalls  and  ambushes 
which  Hildebrand's  self-confidence  would  have  overridden ;  his 
activities  were  therefore  more  circumscribed.  When  he  entered 
on  his  great  task,  he  was  ardent  with  the  disciplined  enthusiasm 


158  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

of  a  man  at  his  best  age.  He  began  by  setting  his  house  in  order ; 
he  made  the  city  Prefect  subject  to  himself,  and  thus  extin- 
guished what  remained  of  the  Imperial  power  in  Rome.  He 
proceeded  to  deal  with  the  Senate,  persuading  the  existing 
Summus  Senator  to  retire,  and  arrogating  to  himself  the  power 
of  choosing  a  new  one  by  means  of  a  self-chosen  elector.  Not 
satisfied  with  this,  he  took  away  one  of  its  most  important 
functions,  the  appointment  of  the  judges,  whom  he  replaced  by 
papal  delegates. 

Beyond  the  confines  of  Rome  lay  the  vague  and  rather 
elastic  patrimony  which  Henry  VI.  had  feudalised  and  carved 
up  into  German  dukedoms.  In  the  recovery  of  the  papal  terri- 
tories, national  instinct  collaborated  with  Innocent's  efi'orts. 
On  Henry's  death,  many  of  them  fell  back,  naturally,  to  their 
former  overlord.  Tuscany,  Ancona  and  Ravenna,  which  had 
been  monopolised  by  Henry's  brother  Philip  and  his  lieutenant 
Markwald,  surrendered  themselves  instantly,  and  a  Tuscan 
Federation  supported  him  in  the  reduction  of  the  rest.  Thus,  in 
two  years,  Innocent  had  restored  the  patrimony  to  the  limits  of 
Pepin's  donation,  and  the  only  temporal  problem  which  still  re- 
mained unsolved  was  that  of  Rome  itself. 

Although  Rome  and  the  idea  of  Rome  is  the  keynote  of 
mediaevalism,  the  city  itself  was  conspicuously  free  from  the 
spirit  of  the  Middle  Ages.  As  the  nominal  capital  of  Christen- 
dom, Rome  plays  the  smallest  possible  part  in  the  movements 
which  convulsed  mediaeval  Europe.  She  contributed  little  or 
nothing  to  the  Crusades,  though  she  reaped  from  them  a  harvest 
of  profit  which  practically  she  seems  hardly  to  have  earned.  It 
is  impossible  to  trace  any  definite  line  of  development  or  any 
steadfastness  of  aim  in  the  history  of  mediaeval  Rome,  because 
she  has  no  civic  ideal  except  that  with  which  the  past  supplies 
her,  and  no  reconstructive  force  with  which  to  revivify  the  old 
order  to  which  she  clings.  It  is  this  peculiar  aimlessness  which 
exposed  Rome  to  the  ravages  of  so  many  political  epidemics, 
and  which  accounts  for  the  prevalence  of  family  feuds — the 
particular  evil  which  confronted  Innocent  III.  The  Orsini  re- 
lations of  the  late  Pope  were  hostile  to  the  Conti,  the  family  of 
Innocent  III.  Innocent  was  accused  of  nepotism  because  he 
made  over  to  his  brother  Richard  a  fortress  which  he  had  taken 
from  the  Orsini,  and  the  Poll  came  forward  to  oppose  him.  The 
feud  was  taken  up  by  the  populace,  which  in  spite  of  the  move- 
ments of  the  twelfth  century  still  retained  its  character  as  the 
"  rabble  of  plebs.".  A  new  popular  Senate  was  formed  under  the 
title  of  the  "Good  men  of  the  Commune".     Towers  were  raised 


CONSOLIDATION  OF  PAPAL  MONAKCHY       159 

and  projectiles  flew ;  Innocent  fled,  returned  again,  and  finally 
gained  by  bribery  the  victory  which  a  three  years'  struggle  had 
failed  to  secure. 

Meanwhile,  in  Sicily,  events  had  occurred  of  the  greatest 
importance  to  the  future  of  the  Empire.  A  rebellion  against 
Constance  and  her  infant  son  h  d  to  an  offer  of  protection  from 
Innocent,  at  the  cost  of  the  investiture  of  the  kingdom.  Soon 
after,  in  1198,  Constance  died,  leaving  the  four-year-old  Frederick 
in  the  guardianship  of  the  Pope.  Innocent  accepted  the  re- 
sponsibilities of  the  Regency  without  counting  the  cost,  and 
finding  vhe  turbulence  of  his  ward's  subjects  too  difficult  a 
problem  to  be  dealt  with  at  a  distance,  he  accepted  the  services 
of  the  adventurer.  Walter  of  Brienne.  Walter  was  a  knight 
errant  of  a  type  which  was  prevalent  in  the  thirteenth  century. 
He  had  married  Tancred's  daughter,  and  was  thus  able  to  put 
forward  a  claim  to  Sicily  through  the  old  Norman  line. 
Innocent,  in  admitting  his  claim,  certainly  overlooked  the  in- 
terests of  Frederick,  but  he  may  have  foreseen  the  greater 
destiny  in  store  for  the  boy,  in  which  the  lesser  dignity  was 
bound  to  be  merged. 

At  the  time,  however,  Frederick  remained  unthought-ot  in 
papal  tutelage  while  the  great  imperial  contest  which  was  to 
bring  him  to  his  own  surged  round  Otto  the  Gwelph  and 
Philip  the  Ghibelline.  Otto  of  Bavaria  was  supported  by  his 
wife's  uncle  Richard  Coeur  de  Lion,  but  the  majority  of  the 
German  princes  swore  allegiance  to  Philip  of  Swabia,  the  brother 
of  Henry  VI.,  who  had  the  advantages  of  the  Hohenstaufen 
territories  and  the  friendship  of  Philip  Augustus  of  France. 
Between  these  two  men,  Innocent  had  to  choose,  and  in  1201, 
he  formally  ratified  the  election  of  Otto.  The  reasons  for  his 
choice  rested  on  the  balance  of  advantages  to  the  Papacy.  The 
Papacy  was  naturally  anti-Hohenstaufen,  for  the  Hohenstaufen 
aim  was  to  create  an  hereditary  monarchy  by  means  of  the  re- 
duction of  Italy.  Moreover,  by  supporting  the  weaker  candidate 
he  was  prolonging  the  contest,  and  schism  in  the  Empire  meant 
advantage  to  the  Papacy.  The  personalities  of  the  two  candi- 
dates inclined  Innocent  in  the  same  direction.  Philip  was 
strong  and  defiant :  Otto  was  weak  and  submissive.  The  Capitu- 
lation of  Neuss  illustrates  the  supreme  importance  of  papal  re- 
cognition to  Otto.  He  was  prepared  to  surrender  all  right  to 
the  Exarchate,  Pentapolis,  Ancona,  Spoleto,  Matilda's  inheri- 
tance, and  "all  other  adjacent  territories  defined  in  Privilegia 
since  Lewis  ".  Inoocent's  next  step  is  difficult  to  account  for : 
Otto  was  more  than  compliant,  and  Philip  actively  hostile,  and 


160  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

yet  the  papal  policy  undoubtedly  begins  to  veer  round.  A  pro- 
pitiatory letter  from  Philip  was  received,  and  in  January,  1206, 
Innocent  upbraids  John  of  England  for  not  supporting  his 
kinsman  Otto.  In  the  same  year  Otto  was  defeated  at  Cologne, 
and  negotiations  were  openly  carried  on  between  Innocent  and 
Philip.  In  1207,  Philip  submitted  to  the  Pope's  terms  and  was 
released  from  the  ban.  In  1208  he  was  King  of  the  Romans, 
and  victory  seemed  all  but  in  his  grasp,  when  he  was  murdered 
at  Bamberg  by  Otto  of  Wittelsbach,  to  whom  he  had  refused  his 
daughter  in  marriage.  The  tragedy  of  Philip's  death  threw 
Innocent  back  on  his  previous  policy,  and  in  1209  Otto  V.  re- 
newed the  Treaty  of  Neuss  at  Speyer,  In  this  second  phase 
Innocent  began  to  make  use  of  his  prot^g^  as  a  means  of  extort- 
ing further  concessions,  and  the  future  hostility  of  the  boy 
Frederick  hung  like  a  sword  over  the  head  of  Otto. 

In  October,  1209,  Otto  came  to  Rome  for  his  coronation,  but 
his  subjection  to  the  Pope  did  not  increase  his  popularity  in 
Italy,  since  it  made  bribery  unnecessary,  and  the  coronation 
battle  was  fiercer  than  ever  in  consequence.  The  coronation 
itself  was  barren  in  meaning  and  abortive  in  result.  Otto  had 
signed  away  all  that  made  the  imperium  worth  striving  for,  and 
no  sooner  had  he  attained  it  than  he  realised  the  anomaly  of  his 
position.  He  therefore  took  the  only  way  of  escape,  broke  the 
treaty,  and  declared  himself  a  Ghibelline.  Jt  was  an  audacious 
volte-face,  but  his  perjury  was  thrust  upon  him  with  the  Empire. 
The  Pope  on  his  side  had  to  acknowledge  the  severity  of  the 
blow,  and  in  a  letter  to  Philip  Augustus  the  tone  in  which  he 
tells  of  the  events  is  unusually  humble :  "  It  is  not  without 
shame  that  I  impart  to  you  my  fears,  for  you  have  often 
warned  me  ". 

The  time  was  now  ripe  for  the  production  of  Frederick  II. 
Otto's  position  was  fairly  well  established  in  Italy,  but  in  Ger- 
many he  was  fast  losing  ground.  At  the  head  of  a  small  force 
Frederick  made  his  way  to  Germany,  where  Innocent's  emis- 
saries had  gone  before  him  to  prepare  a  party.  At  Bouvines,  in 
1214,  he  met  and  defeated  Otto's  army,  with  Philip  Augustus  on 
his  side  and  the  English  against  him.  In  this,  his  first,  enter- 
prise, Frederick  was  recognised  by  the  world  as  a  young  man  of 
great  promise  and  energy.  In  his  golden  bull  of  1213  he  pro- 
mised obedience  to  the  Church,  liberty  of  ecclesiastical  elections, 
and  the  right  of  appeal  to  Rome,  "in  consideration  for  the 
immense  and  innumerable  benefits  of  his  protector  and  bene- 
factor, Pope  Innocent ".  He  undertook  further  to  cut  off  Sicily 
in  the  name  of  his  son  as   soon  as  his  own  coronation  was 


CONSOLIDATION  OF  PAPAL  MONARCHY       161 

eflfected.  So  far  all  was  well  for  Innocent  and  the  Papacy  ; 
Frederick's  attitude  was  correct  and  unimpeachable  ;  he  was  the 
dutiful  son  of  the  Pope  in  more  than  name,  and  the  seal  of 
success  was  upon  him.  But  Frederick,  the  victor  of  Bouvines, 
had  yet  to  reveal  himself  as  Frederick,  the  wonder  of  the  world. 

The  effect  on  the  Papacy  of  Innocent's  interference  in  the 
contest  for  the  Empire  was  to  extend  and  confirm,  on  the  one 
hand,  the  tradition  of  the  spiritual  imperium,  and  diminish,  on 
the  other  hand,  its  popularity  in  Europe.  The  poems  of  Walther 
von  der  Vogelweide,  in  all  their  bitterness  and  sarcasm,  indicate 
the  feelings  of  the  average  German  towards  the  policy  of  Inno- 
cent. The  theory  upon  which  Innocent's  policy  was  grounded 
is  still  more  significant.  The  new  metaphor  of  the  two  swords 
supplants  the  older  and  less  extravagant  symbol  of  the  two 
lights  in  heaven.  In  the  time  of  Gregory,  the  Papacy  and  the 
Empire  were  said  to  coexist  as  distinct  powers,  the  one  greater 
and  the  other  less.  In  the  time  of  Innocent,  we  read  that  "the 
Pope  has  two  swords ;  he  keeps  for  himself  the  spiritual  sword, 
and  gives  to  the  Emperor  the  temporal  one :  when  he  rides  his 
white  palfrey  the  Emperor  is  compelled  to  hold  his  stirrup  ". 

The  Empire,  which  Innocent  regarded  as  emanating  from  the 
Papacy,  was  still  in  theory  world-Avide.  The  temporal  sword  of 
St.  Peter  stretched  far  beyond  Italy  and  Germany  to  the  limits 
of  Christendom,  and  the  spiritual  relationship  in  its  political 
interpretation  implied  the  vassalage  of  Europe  to  the  See  of 
Rome.  Sicily,  Denmark,  and  Sweden  had  already  fallen  in. 
Sancho  of  Portugal  renewed  to  Innocent  the  homage  first  ren- 
dered in  1144.  Peter  of  Aragon,  in  1204,  placed  his  crown  on 
the  High  Altar  of  St.  Peter's,  and  received  it  back  attached  to 
the  condition  of  tribute.  Three  years  later  Poland  did  the  same, 
and  three  Oriental  princes  of  Armenia,  Bulgaria,  and  Servia  fol- 
lowed. In  all  these  cases  it  is  important  not  to  overlook  the 
voluntary  character  of  the  profi'ered  submission.  Emphasis  is 
too  often  laid  on  Innocent's  ambitious  exactions,  obscuring  the 
fact  that  the  nations  which  submitted  gained  in  return  privileges, 
spiritual  and  political,  which  amply  requited  them,  in  their  own 
estimation,  for  the  sacrifice  of  their  independence.  The  com- 
pliance of  the  nations  was  indeed  a  misfortune  in  disguise  to  the 
Papacy  ;  there  is  no  department  of  Innocent's  policy  more  im- 
mediately successful  and  ultimately  disastrous  than  his  relations 
with  England. 

Originating  in  a  question  of  ecclesiastical  etiquette,  the 
comparative  rights  of  two  bands  of  monks  to  elect  an  English 
Archbishop,  a  great  personal  duel  emerged  between  Innocent 
11 


162  A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

and  the  worst-hated  of  English  kings.  The  incidents  of  the 
struggle,  and  still  more,  the  conditions  of  its  conclusion — too 
familiar  to  recapitulate  here — alienated  the  heart  of  a  nation 
for  ever  from  its  allegiance  to  the  Papacy.  England  had  until 
now  retained  a  singularly  pure  and  loyal  attitude  towards  the 
papal  ideal.  Mindful  of  the  debt  which  she  owed  to  Gregory 
the  Great,  she  submitted  dutifully  to  the  supremacy,  in  the 
belief  that  the  regeneration  of  the  world  was  still  its  animating 
impulse.  Protestantism  was  never  a  part  of  the  English  char- 
acter. The  hostility  to  papal  exactions,  which  is  henceforth 
typical  of  our  history,  had  its  origin  in  the  shock  of  contrast 
between  the  Catholic  ideal,  as  it  was  possible  to  conceive  it  in 
a  remote  island  kingdom,  and  the  temporal  policy  which  the 
mediaeval  popes  found  it  necessary  to  pursue.  Thus  England 
had  eagerly  taken  up  the  cause  of  reform,  and  the  English  kings 
had  been  among  the  first  to  respond  to  the  appeal  of  the  Crusades, 
both  of  which  movements  had  emanated  from  the  Papacy. 
Innocent's  great  mistake  was  that  he  failed  to  read  the  English 
character  or  to  take  the  measure  of  King  John.  The  appoint- 
ment of  Stephen  Langton,  excellent  in  itself,  was  dearly  bought 
by  the  Interdict.  John's  submission  and  humiliation  in  1213 
was  a  still  more  questionable  victory.  In  pronouncing  England 
to  be  a  fief  of  the  Papacy,  Innocent  ignored  the  constitutional 
progress  which  the  nation  had  made  under  the  Norman  kings ; 
he  forgot  that  the  privileges  which  Henry  II.  had  taught  the 
nation  to  cherish  had  placed  England  on  a  different  footing  from 
Poland  and  Armenia.  Thus,  Innocent  was  soon  to  discover  that 
the  humiliation  of  King  John  had  not  brought  England  low.  At 
Runnymede,  as  at  Canossa,  the  nobility,  representing  the  nation, 
recoiled  from  the  abasement  of  the  King,  and  dissociated  itself 
from  the  consequences  of  it.  The  essence  of  the  tragedy,  from 
the  papal  point  of  view,  lay  in  the  fact  that  in  the  great  consti- 
tutional drama  of  Magna  Carta,  the  Pope  stood  side  by  side  with 
John  and  his  tyranny  in  the  face  of  the  charter  of  liberties,  with 
the  first  great  patriot  Churchman  at  its  head.  Or,  in  the  words 
of  Matthew  Paris,  "  The  sovereign  Pontiff,  who  ought  to  be  the 
source  of  sanctity,  the  mirror  of  piety,  the  guardian  of  justice, 
the  defender  of  truth,  protects  such  a  man !  Why  does  he  take 
his  part?  To  engulf  the  riches  of  England  in  the  coffers  of 
Roman  avarice." 

Something  of  the  same  lack  of  imagination  characterised 
Innocent's  dealings  with  France.  If  he  had  over-estimated 
King  John,  he  certainly  under-rated  his  rival,  Philip  Augustus. 
But  on  thp  whole,  he  was  more  successful  in  his  relations  with 


CONSOLIDATION  OF  PAPAL  MONAKCHY       163 

the  greater  than  with  the  meaner  monarch.  In  punishing  the 
adultery  of  Philip  with  the  Interdict,  Innocent  was  certainly 
within  his  rights.  Moreover,  he  succeeded  in  eflfecting  a  re- 
conciliation between  the  King  and  his  repudiated  wife.  But  in 
affairs  of  policy,  Philip  was  more  resolute  than  in  the  moral 
sphere.  When  Innocent  tried  to  interfere  in  the  first  phase  of 
his  quarrel  with  King  John,  he  was  told  to  mind  his  own  business, 
for  -'the  Pope  has  nothing  to  do  with  an  affair  which  rests  be- 
tween kings".  Philip's  letter  of  protest  against  the  Pope's 
alliance  with  Otto  of  Brunswick  is  still  more  high-handed.  "  I 
am  astonished  at  your  persistence  in  protecting  a  prince  whose 
family  interests  make  him  the  enemy  of  your  kingdom.  As 
your  Holiness  knows  well,  I  regard  the  elevation  of  this  prince 
to  whom  you  attach  yourself  in  so  inconsiderate  a  manner,  as  a 
disgrace  for  all  Christian  kings.  If  you  persist,  I  shall  know  how 
to  take  necessary  steps."  The  implied  threat  may  or  may  not 
have  had  something  to  do  with  Innocent's  change  of  front  in 
1207,  but  it  was  undoubtedly  the  "warning"  to  which  Innocent 
subsequently  referred  in  his  appeal  for  Philip's  assistance  against 
Otto. 

The  ultimate  object  of  Innocent's  foreign  policy,  beyond  the 
extension  of  the  prerogative,  was  the  hope  of  viniting  Europe  in 
a  new  Crusade.  The  project  was,  however,  a  failure,  the  only 
result  of  which  was  the  conquest  of  the  Eastern  Empire,  and  the 
indefinite  postponement  of  unity  between  the  Eastern  and 
Western  Churches.  Innocent's  zeal  for  the  Catholic  faith  mili- 
tant was  not  confined  to  the  East.  Nearer  home  the  growth  of 
heresy  was  a  symptom  of  a  new  danger  which  threatened 
Catholic  unity.  Against  the  Albigensian  sect  of  southern  France 
the  feudal  forces  of  the  orthodox  north  were  urged  forward  by 
papal  appeals.  The  brutality  and  the  terror  of  the  Albigensian 
war  burdens  the  reign  of  Innocent  with  an  awful  responsibility. 
He  had  called  out  the  passionate  force  of  hatred  between  north 
and  south  which  reveals  itself  unexpectedly  now  and  again  in 
French  history,  and  he  himself  recoiled  from  the  consequences. 

The  appeal  from  doctrine  to  arms  was  characteristic  of 
Innocent.  His  mind  was  essentially  practical :  he  chose  to 
vindicate  the  truth  on  the  battle-field  rather  than  in  council; 
where  others  might  have  used  persuasion,  Innocent  enacted 
laws.  The  result  of  this  natural  bias  of  his  mind,  coinciding  as 
it  did  with  the  epoch  of  extreme  papal  accretion,  was  a  tendency 
to  define  and  to  increase  in  defining  the  theory  of  spiritual 
power  in  all  its  departments.  We  have  seen  how  this  affected 
the  political  relations  of  the  Papacy  towards  other  powers.    Since 


164    A  SHOKT  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

the  Pope  had  established  his  claim  to  be  paramount  in  Europe, 
there  could  be  no  more  question  of  the  Emperor's  right  to  elect 
him.  Since  the  time  of  Hildebrand,  the  Emperor  had  entirely- 
dropped  out  of  elections,  and  the  Cardinals,  to  whom  the  right 
had  fallen,  had  become  more  and  more  important.  The  great 
difficulty  of  the  twelfth  century  was  to  secure  unanimity  among 
them,  the  lack  of  which  produced  serious  schisms,  such  as  that 
of  Alexander  III.  and  Victor  IV.,  which  had  lasted  18  years. 
The  third  Lateran  Council  of  1179  decided  that  the  unanimity 
of  the  Cardinals  was  necessary  to  election,  a  canon  which  pro- 
tracted the  elections  to  an  inconceivable  length,  until  the  forma- 
tion of  the  conclave  at  the  Council  of  Lyons  in  1274.  Supported 
by  the  Cardinalate  the  Papacy  was  safe  from  any  attempt  to 
dispute  its  independence.  Strong  at  the  centre,  it  could  diffuse 
strength  in  every  radius. 

The  methods  by  which  the  Papacy  maintained  its  sovereignty 
throughout  the  world  owe  their  origin  peculiarly  to  Innocent  the 
Great.  His  masterly  wisdom  in  promoting  the  system  of  central- 
isation and  avoiding  the  dangers  of  suzerainty  was  his  greatest 
achievement.  By  innumerable  small  threads  of  legislation, 
Rome  kept  in  touch  with  the  farthest  provinces  of  Christendom. 
There  was  penitentiary  reservation  for  extreme  sins  :  for  certain 
offences  absolution  had  to  be  sought  in  Rome.  The  right  of 
canonisation  was  reserved  for  the  Pope  under  Alexander  III. ; 
Innocent  extended  this  to  the  power  of  authenticating  relics. 
In  the  time  of  the  Crusades,  vows  were  apt  to  be  made  im- 
pulsively and  the  Cross  taken  without  due  thought :  exemptions 
and  dispensations  could  only  be  given  by  the  Pope  himself. 
The  Pope  alone  could  convoke  and  dissolve  oecumenical  councils. 
Appeals  to  Rome  in  questions  of  jurisdiction  increased  under 
Innocent's  encouragement,  and  became  a  reproach  owing  to 
their  number  and  informality.  Under  Hadrian  IV.  the  right  was 
acquired  of  conferring  benefices  in  foreign  countries.  It  was 
only  after  a  time  that  this  last  privilege  became  an  abuse :  its 
immediate  result  was  to  bring  forward  good  men  who  would 
otherwise  have  remained  in  obscurity,  and  to  counteract  the 
influence  of  the  local  landlord.  In  1245,  however,  the  English 
Bishops  complained  of  the  number  of  Italian  clergy  in  England, 
and  ten  years  later  the  abuse  was  removed  by  Alexander  IV. 
who  restricted  the  number  of  papal  benefices  to  four  in  each 
chapter.  It  had  already  become  the  custom  for  a  newly  con- 
secrated Bishop  to  make  a  special  journey  to  Rome,  and  in  the 
time  of  Innocent  these  voyages  "  ad  limina  "  became  a  fixed 
rule.     Nothing  could  exceed  the  importance  of  these  personal 


CONSOLIDATION  OF  PAPAL  MONAKCHY       165 

interviews  in  holding  the  loyalty  of  national  churches  to  the 
Papacy.  It  cannot  be  denied  that  these  provisions  dealt  a 
severe  blow  at  the  power  of  the  Metropolitans,  whose  authority 
they  tended  to  circumscribe.  But  the  idea  of  Innocent  and 
the  other  Popes  who  promoted  the  policy  was  in  no  way  hostile  ; 
their  desire  was  merely  to  associate  themselves  with  the  national 
authority,  and  to  encourage  the  Archbishops  to  regard  them- 
selves also  as  part  and  parcel  of  the  great  world  system.  This 
they  never  succeeded  in  doing.  The  career  of  Stephen  Langton 
shows  how  a  great  Archbishop  ranged  himself  naturally  on  the 
side  of  nationality,  in  the  struggle  against  John,  regardless  of 
Innocent's  championship  of  the  King. 

The  framework  of  the  Catholic  Church  was  thus  completed, 
and  put  together  by  the  great  lawyer  Pope.  The  spiritual  do- 
minion became  a  perfect  legal  system.  But  Innocent's  achieve- 
ment did  not  end  here.  His  work  of  definition  was  carried  into 
the  innermost  sanctities  of  religion.  The  hidden  mysteries  of 
the  Catholic  faitti  were  brought  out  into  the  hard  daylight,  and 
its  most  transcendental  doctrines  were  defined  in  the  crude  ter- 
minology of  thirteenth-century  reasoning.  The  word  "  Tran- 
substantiation"  was  brought  into  use  for  the  first  time,  and 
Communion  was  no  longer  given  in  both  kinds.  Public  penance 
had  fallen  into  disuse,  and  in  its  place,  Private  Confession  be- 
came a  matter  of  fixed  rule.  The  Sacraments  were  expressed 
as  rigidly  as  the  Canon  law,  and  the  ritual  in  which  they  were 
veiled  became  richer  and  more  mystical,  gaining  in  ceremonial 
dignity  what  it  lost  in  spontaneity.  The  danger  of  all  this  was 
that  it  tended  towards  excessive  formality  at  the  expense  of 
reality  in  religion.  It  is  an  open  question  how  far  defini- 
tion really  simplifies  the  truth,  and  it  is  probable  that  one  re- 
sult of  Innocent's  influence  on  Catholic  doctrine  was  to  take 
away  much  of  that  organic  vitality  which  belonged  to  earlier 
ages. 

The  emphasis  laid  on  sacramental  teaching  by  Innocent 
naturally  strengthened  the  principle  of  authority  within  the 
Church.  It  was  inevitable  that  it  should  go  still  further.  The 
power  of  the  keys  had  no  disciplinary  force  beyond  the  pale  of 
orthodoxy,  and  some  new  method  had  to  be  devised  for  the  sal- 
vation of  the  rebel.  One  of  the  principal  objects  of  Innocent's 
great  Lateran  Council  of  1215,  at  which  representatives  from  all 
the  European  powers  were  present,  was  to  provide  a  remedy  for 
the  prevention  of  heresy.  The  result  was  that  a  code  of  penalties 
was  drawn  up  by  Innocent,  and  the  power  of  enforcing  it  was 
entrusted  to  the  bishops  and  their  delegates.     This  is  said  to  be 


166         A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

the  origin  of  the  Inquisition,  but  it  would  be  unfair  to  ascribe 
to  the  very  moderate  code  of  Innocent  the  responsibility  for  the 
excesses  of  the  Holy  Office  in  later  ages. 

If  the  reforms  of  Innocent  tended  to  ignore  the  claims  of  the 
individual,  the  process  was  largely  counteracted  by  the  new 
development  of  monasticism,  which  centres  round  the  names  of 
Francis  and  Dominic.  The  two  saints,  animated  by  a  passion  of 
human  pity,  the  one  for  the  conscious  spiritual  needs  of  the 
world,  the  other  for  its  unconscious  peril  of  ignorance,  gave  an 
ideal  to  their  generation  which  has  never  faded.  The  simplicity 
of  St.  Francis  of  Assisi  pierced  beyond  the  outward  splendour  of 
the  great  Church  militant,  and  felt  the  reproach  of  the  suffering 
and  sorrow  which  it  left  untouched.  The  clergy  had  done  what 
they  could,  but  the  regulars  were  aloof  and  austere,  the  seculars 
were  worldly  and  rich,  and  neither  of  them  had  much  time  or 
thought  to  spare  for  the  individual  needs  of  the  poor.  It  was 
not  until  the  "  Poor  little  man  of  Assisi  "  came  amongst  them  as  ia 
brother  that  the  claims  of  the  defenceless  were  recognised,  apart 
from  their  function  as  channels  for  the  virtue  of  alms-giving. 
What  the  distress  of  the  poor  was  to  St.  Francis,  the  growth  of 
heresy  meant  to  St.  Dominic.  In  his  Spanish  home  he  saw  men 
hounded  and  persecuted  for  error  without  the  opportunity  of 
knowing  the  truth,  which  the  clergy  were  too  ignorant  to  teach, 
or  too  mystical  to  make  intelligible  to  the  simple.  The  founda- 
tion of  the  Franciscans,  in  1209,  and  of  the  Dominicans,  in  1215, 
sealed  the  golden  age  of  the  mediaeval  Church.  It  is  not  the 
least  of  Innocent's  titles  to  greatness  that  he  recognised  the 
power  of  the  love  of  Francis,  and  the  wisdom  of  Dominic,  and 
the  need  of  the  world  for  both. 


CHAPTER  XVI 
THE  CONTEST  WITH  FREDERICK  STUPOR  MUNDI 

«  r   I    ^HE  right  and  power  of  examining  the  person  elected  to 
I  the  kingdom  and  pretending  to  the  Empire  belongs," 

"^  says  Innocent,  "  to  ourselves,  who  anoint,  consecrate, 
and  crown  him."  The  assertion  is  made  with  the  assm'ance  of 
absolute  power  to  establish  his  claim  and  to  accomplish  its  results. 
Gregory  IX.  incorporates  the  words  in  his  digest  of  canon  law, 
grounding  it  on  the  historical  theory  of  the  translation  of  the 
Empire,  for  which  Innocent  is  also  responsihle.  The  assertion  is 
that  the  Pope  originally  took  away  the  Empire  from  the  Greek 
Emperors  and  gave  it  to  Charles  the  Frank,  and  that  the  authority 
then  exercised  by  Leo  the  Great  was  vested  in  his  successors  for 

ever. 

This  theory  of  the  Translatio  was  hardly  formulated  before  it 
was  challenged  by  the  most  remarkable  of  the  champions  of  the 
Empire.  The  Papacy  had  already  confronted  Emperors  who  were 
mightier  than  Frederick  II.,  but  none  who  were  more  formidable. 
The  great  Emperors  of  mediaeval  tradition  were  simple  and  heroic, 
violent  men  like  Charlemagne,  and  rugged  like  Barbarossa.  But 
the  character  of  Frederick  II.  baffled  the  men  of  his  own  day  as 
it  astonishes  the  historians  of  ours.  He  stands  outside  the  cen- 
turies and  defies  the  categories  of  type.  Every  paradox  of 
psychology  seems  to  be  found  in  his  personality :  astoundingly 
modern,  and  yet  superstitious  and  intolerant ;  subtle  and  cruel, 
but  charming  and  lovable,  a  despot  and  a  troubadour,  a  philoso- 
pher and  a  sensualist.  And  yet,  the  whole  is  something  more 
than  a  medley  of  inconsistent  qualities  ;  hardly  a  great  man,  and 
emphatically  not  a  successful  one,  the  verdict  of  posterity  places 
him  beyond  the  pale  of  history — essentially  Stupor  Mundi,  the 
Wonder  of  the  World. 

Temperament,  dynasty,  and  political  philosophy  foredoomed 
Frederick  as  the  last  champion  of  the  great  mediaeval  Empire 
against  the  Papacy.  The  struggle  did  not  end  with  him,  but  the 
last  phase  is  merely  the  aftermath  of  Frederick's  contest — the 
epilogue  by  which  the  tragedy  dies  into  pathos.    Three  Popes 

167 


168  A  SHOET  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

spent  their  energies  in  opposing  him,  two  of  whom  were  consum- 
mate statesmen.  To  regret  that  so  much  energy  and  power 
should  have  been  expended  in  a  cause  which  was  mainly  tem- 
poral is  to  regret  that  the  thirteenth  century  Church  was 
mediaeval.  The  Popes  fought  against  Frederick  for  the  theory  of 
supremacy,  and  for  the  means  to  enforce  it :  sometimes  exaggera- 
ted into  arrogance,  and  sometimes  distorted  into  greed,  the  theory 
itself  was  the  indispensable  adjunct  of  mediaeval  Catholicism. 

The  successor  of  Innocent  was  Honorius  III.,  a  member  of 
the  noble  House  of  Savelli,  and  a  man  beloved  in  Rome  for  his 
goodness.  One  object  and  one  only  lay  near  to  his  heart,  his 
zeal  for  the  Crusade.  Frederick  had  taken  the  Cross,  but  he 
showed  no  corresponding  zeal  to  fulfil  his  vow.  The  truth  was 
that  the  crusading  ideal  represented  the  spirit  of  an  age  which 
was  passing  away,  and  Europe  had  grown  a  little  tired  of  it. 
Frederick,  moreover,  had  pressing  duties  to  keep  him  at  home. 
His  Sicilian  kingdom  had  fallen  into  a  state  of  chaos  during  his 
minority,  and  the  great  Hohenstaufen  scheme  of  erecting  a  strong 
Italian  monarchy  was  already  uppermost  in  his  mind.  Of  this 
monarchy  Sicily  was  to  be  the  base,  and  the  Empire  the  pretext 
of  acquisition.  The  gentleness  of  Honorius  was  already  ruffled 
by  Frederick's  delay  in  carrying  out  his  vow  :  he  was  still  further 
irritated  by  Frederick's  importunacy  in  petitioning  for  his  corona- 
tion, and  for  the  "adoption  of  his  son,  already  King  of  Sicily,  as 
heir  to  the  Empire.  Frederick  soothed  the  Pope  by  a  large  grant 
of  privileges,  and  renewed  the  promise  that  Sicily  and  Germany 
should  never  be  permanently  united.  At  the  same  moment,  how- 
ever, he  secured  his  son's  election  to  the  Empire  and  wrung  from 
Honorius  a  sanction  for  his  life-possession  of  Sicily.  The  Pope 
was  not  in  a  position  to  stand  out,  owing  to  the  turbulence  of 
Rome,  and  Frederick  gracefully  atoned  by  a  tactful  mediation 
between  Honorius  and  the  Romans,  which  enabled  the  Pope  to 
return  with  honour  to  the  city.  The  coronation  of  Frederick  and 
Constance  immediately  followed,  in  1220,  "amid  universal  re- 
joicings," and  Frederick  renewed  his  crusading  vow  for  the 
following  August. 

Honorius  meanwhile  was  reaping  the  usual  efifects  of  a  strong 
pontificate  in  a  series  of  rebellions  in  the  Patrimony.  Troubles 
arose  in  Spoleto  and  Ancona,  and  a  more  serious  outbreak  of 
Roman  hostility  in  1221  centred  round  the  town  of  Viterbo, 
which  Honorius  endeavoured  to  protect  from  the  hostility  of  the 
Roman  Commune.  The  Pope's  suppression  of  a  democratic  rising 
in  Perugia  further  enflamed  Republican  sentiment,  and  a 
rebellion  under  Richard  Conti  drove  Honorius  once  more  to 


CONTEST  WITH  FREDEKICK  STUPOR  MUNDI    169 

flight.  Whether  with  or  without  reason,  Honorins  kept  a 
suspicious  eye  on  Frederick  and  his  constructive  work  in  Sicily, 
and  laid  many  of  his  troubles  at  the  Emperor's  door.  But  before 
long  Frederick  gave  him  real  cause  for  alarm.  Having  com- 
pleted his  work  in  Sicily,  he  asserted  claims  over  the  cities  of 
North  Italy,  and,  goaded  further  by  their  resistance,  announced 
his  determination  to  claim  the  whole  of  Italy  as  his  "  inherit- 
ance ".  In  answer  to  this  challenge,  the  Lombard  League  sprang 
to  life  again  in  March,  1226.  At  the  same  moment  John  of 
Brienne,  the  titular  King  of  Jerusalem,  appeared  before  Honorius 
as  a  plaintiff.  The  Pope  had  encouraged  the  Emperor  to  marry 
as  his  second  wife  John's  daughter,  Yolande,  hoping  thereby  to 
increase  his  interest  in  the  fate  of  Jerusalem.  John  of  Brienne 
now  complained  with  some  justification  that  his  son-in-law  had 
usurped  his  title.  The  last  straw  was  the  clash  between  mon- 
archical and  ecclesiastical  rights  in  connection  with  episcopal 
investiture  in  Sicily.  Honorius,  the  lover  of  peace,  committed 
himself  to  war  :  on  a  pretext  of  arbitration  he  threw  in  his  lot  with 
the  cities,  and  by  a  fortuitous  combination  of  interests  the  papal 
fortunes  were  once  more  united  with  the  forces  of  independence. 

The  death  of  Honorius  III.  in  March,  1227,  saved  him  from 
the  uncongenial  enterprise  which  circumstances  had  thrust  upon 
him.  The  accession  of  Gregory  IX.  hurried  events  forward  with 
sudden  rapidity.  He  was  a  relation — probably  a  nephew — of 
Innocent  III.,  brought  up  under  his  influence  and  imbued  with 
his  tradition.  As  Cardinal  Hugolinus  of  Ostia  he  had  watched 
with  growing  irritation  the  patience  and  long-suffering  of 
Honorius  towards  the  delinquencies  of  Frederick.  His  own 
energy  swept  the  situation  like  a  whirlwind  after  a  period  of 
sullen  stillness.  He  ordered  Frederick  instantly  to  start  on  his 
Crusade.  Frederick  was  startled  into  obedience,  and  set  out  from 
Brindisi ;  but  hardly  had  the  Te  Deum  of  his  host  died  away 
than  he  was  back  again,  pleading  the  ravages  of  an  epidemic,  and 
alleging  that  he  himself  had  been  taken  ill  at  sea.  Gregory  saw 
through  the  pretext,  which  was  real,  to  the  professions  of  regret, 
which  were  unreal.  He  recalled  the  Emperor's  action  with  regard 
to  the  Lombard  cities  and  the  Sicilian  bishoprics,  and  throwing 
off  the  semblance  of  a  peace  from  which  the  substance  had  long 
since  vanished,  he  excommunicated  Frederick  at  Anagni  on 
September  29,  1227. 

Frederick  accepted  the  papal  denunciation  in  the  spirit  in 
which  it  was  meant,  and  took  up  the  gage  of  battle.  Among 
his  many  talents  was  a  masterly  power  of  pleading  his  own  cause. 
His  exculpation,  addressed  to  the  kings  of  Europe,  justified  his 


170  A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

return  from  the  Crusade  and  impeached  the  absolutism  of  the 
Pope.  Frederick's  manifesto  was  widely  advertised,  and  it  was 
hailed  with  joy  on  the  Capitol.  All  the  factions  of  anarchy — 
nobles,  republicans,  and  heretics — claimed  it  as  their  brief 
against  Gregory,  whose  attempts  to  establish  strong  government 
had  already  made  him  unpopular.  During  his  absence,  a  mock 
pope  was  allowed  to  sell  dispensations  to  the  crusaders  on  their 
way  back  from  Brindisi.  Scandals  such  as  this  caused  Gregory 
to  repeat  the  anathema  in  Rome,  but  he  was  interrupted  by 
Ghibelline  insults,  and  obliged  to  take  refuge  at  Viterbo.  Fred- 
erick's next  move  was  a  master-stroke  of  ingenuity  :  excom- 
municated as  he  was,  he  set  out  again  for  the  Crusade,  and  thus 
took  the  wind  out  of  Gregory's  sails.  To  the  astonishment 
of  Christendom,  Gregory  placed  every  obstacle  in  his  way,  and 
finding  himself  powerless  to  prevent  the  expedition,  followed  it 
out  to  Jerusalem  with  his  curse.  The  Knights  Templars  and 
Hospitallers  held  aloof  from  Frederick's  Crusade,  but  the  new 
order  of  Teutonic  Knights  had  followed  him.  It  was  unfortun- 
ate for  Gregory's  position  that  the  expedition  was  a  brilliant 
success.  While  the  Pope  was  preaching  a  holy  war  against  him 
in  Europe,  Frederick  reconquered  the  Holy  Land  and  crowned 
himself  King  of  Jerusalem.  He  returned  and  tried  to  make 
peace ;  failing,  he  turned  soon  and  tried  again.  Finally,  in  1230, 
a  flood  in  Rome,  which  brought  the  population  in  terror  to  the 
feet  of  the  Pope,  made  Gregory  more  amenable,  and  a  one-sided 
peace  was  vouchsafed  to  Frederick  at  San  Germano. 

The  Crusade  of  Frederick  II.  had  alienated  the  world  from 
the  papal  cause.  Contemporary  authors  of  England  and  France 
seemed  to  think  that  his  excommunication  was  unjust,  and 
that  Gregory's  action  in  opposing  a  Crusade,  even  if  it  was  under- 
taken by  a  sinner,  was  inconsistent  with  a  belief  in  the  expiatory 
power  of  the  Holy  Wars.  But  the  real  issue  at  stake  between 
Gregory  and  Frederick  was  one  which  could  not  be  realised  from 
a  distance.  The  Hohenstaufen  ideal  of  Italian  monarchy  would 
undoubtedly  have  enslaved  the  Papacy  and  undone  the  work  of 
Hildebrand.  The  struggle  of  the  Papacy  against  the  Emperors, 
in  spite  of  the  unworthiness  of  many  of  its  incidents,  gains  in 
dignity  and  importance  when  we  recall  the  dangers  of  the  alter- 
native. Had  Frederick's  ideal  been  realised,  the  spiritual  power 
would  have  succumbed;  subject  Popes  would  have  once  more 
ruled  the  universal  Church,  and  all  efforts  at  reform  and  re- 
generation would  have  been  dependent  on  the  goodwill  of  the 
Emperors. 

The  peace   of  San  Germano  lasted  about  six  years,  during 


CONTEST  WITH  FEEDEBICK  STUPOK  MUNDI    171 

which  the  activities  of  Gregory  were  monoplised  by  the  troubles 
with  Rome.  The  Popes  were  always  vacillating  between  severity 
and  indulgence  in  their  dealings  with  the  ungrateful  city,  which 
could  neither  prosper  with  nor  without  them.  Gregory  first 
bought  his  way  back  with  doles,  and  then  made  himself  felt  by 
a  reign  of  terror.  He  was  the  warm  champion  of  the  new 
mendicant  orders,  and  with  their  assistance  he  waged  relentless 
war  on  the  heretics,  who  had  increased  and  multiplied  during 
his  absence.  The  inquisition  proper,  with  its  terrors  and  its 
fanaticism,  originated  in  the  age  of  Gregory  IX.,  and  in  Rome  no 
clear  line  was  drawn  between  doctrinal  and  political  heresy.  A 
serious  rebellion  of  the  Romans  in  1234  attracted  the  attention 
of  Europe  for  the  first  time  to  the  home  government  and  do- 
mestic difficulties  of  the  Papacy.  The  centre  of  attack  was 
Viterbo,  the  Pope's  harbour  of  refuge,  and  the  leader  of  the 
populace  was  Luca  Savelli  of  the  urban  nobility.  The  country 
nobles  were  generally  loyal  to  Gregory,  and  the  Emperor,  glad 
of  an  opportunity  to  improve  his  relations  with  him,  came  to 
his  aid.  The  rebellion  of  Frederick's  eldest  son  in  Lombardy 
was  another  reason  for  his  anxiety  to  befriend  the  Pope.  At 
his  bidding  the  princes  of  Europe  looked  on  the  enterprise  as  a 
Crusade.  Raymond  of  Toulouse  and  other  warriors  flocked  to 
the  papal  standard  and  defeated  the  Romans  at  Viterbo.  The 
Emperor  formed  a  peace,  according  to  which  the  Romans  lost 
all  the  privileges  they  had  fought  for. 

The  Roman  rebellion  gave  Frederick  the  time  which  he 
wanted  to  prepare  for  the  project  on  which  he  had  staked  his 
career,  the  conquest  of  Lombardy.  He  paid  a  short  visit  to 
Germany,  subdued  his  son,  and  married  Isobel  of  England. 
Then  he  returned  to  Italy,  and  on  a  pretext  of  punishing  the 
Lombard  cities  for  supporting  Henry,  he  prepared  an  expedition 
for  the  conquest  of  Italy,  relying  mainly  for  his  support  on  the 
feudal  nobles — the  "  tyrants  "  of  the  cities  who  were  the  natural 
enemies  of  the  democratic  movement. 

Gregory  from  the  first  threw  himself  unreservedly  on  to  the 
side  of  the  cities.  The  opponent  of  democratic  liberties  in 
Rome  became  the  ardent  champion  of  the  rights  of  the  free 
cities  against  Hohenstaufen  aggression.  He  bought  his  return 
to  Rome  for  .£10,000  in  1237,  and  in  November  following,  he 
heard  of  Frederick's  great  victory  at  Cortenuova.  The  "  Wonder 
of  the  World  "  entered  Cremona  with  the  pomp  of  an  Oriental 
victor,  parading  the  Carroccio  of  Milan,  drawn  by  his  famous 
white  elephant  through  the  streets,  with  the  captive  Podest^  of 
the  city  bound  to  its  mast.     The  Carroccio,  or  wagon  of  Milan, 


172  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

was  the  paladium  of  the  cities,  and  what  remained  of  it  at  the 
end  of  the  revels  Frederick  characteristically  sent  to  Rome,  as 
a  dehcate  insult  to  the  Pope.     Gregory  did  not  fail  to.  read  'the 
message.     He  encouraged  the  cities  to  stand  out  against  Fred- 
erick's demand  for  unconditional  surrender,  and  actively  joined 
in  by  organising  a  maritime  league.     In  1239  he  proceeded  to  ex- 
communicate Frederick,  on  the  groundless  pretext  that  he  had 
incited  the  Romans  to  revolt.     Frederick  cleared  himself  in  a 
brilliant  speech,  which  his  able  chancellor,  Peter  della  Vigna, 
delivered  before  the  Parliament  at  Padua.     He  appealed  especi- 
ally  to   the  Romans,  touching  skilfully  the  chords  of  flattery 
which  never  failed  to  move  them.     Gregory's  vigorous  answer 
shows  something  more  than  political  resentment :  "  A  beast  rose 
from  the  sea  filled  with  names  of  blasphemy,  furnished  with  the 
claws  of  the  bear,  the  jaws  of  a  lion,  and  in  body  resembling  a 
panther".  His  indictment  contains  the  first  definite  impeach- 
ment of  Frederick's  orthodoxy,  and  raises  a  question  which  has 
exercised  the  minds  of  all  the  biographers  of  this  astonishing 
Emperor.     Frederick   certainly   showed  a   breadth   of  outlook 
which  was   far   in   advance   of  anything   that   the   thirteenth 
century  could  conceive.     Instead  of  exterminating  his  Saracen 
enemies   after  the  capture  of  Jerusalem,  he  had  made  peace 
with  them.     In  Sicily   he   had   not   only   tolerated   a   Saracen 
settlement  at  Lucera,  but  he  had  surrounded  himself  with   a 
Saracen  body-guard  and  encouraged  Arabic   professors   in   his 
new  University  of  Palermo.     The  "  blasphemies  "   of  Frederick, 
in  some  cases  obviously  mis-recorded  by  ecclesiastical  enemies 
and  in  others  liable  to  double  interpretation,  give  the  general 
impression  of  a  man  who  has  outgrown  the  expression  of  the 
faith  of  his  age.     He  is  neither  irreligious  nor  defiant,  but  he 
is  goaded  into  opposition  by  a  sense  of  the  injustice  and  lack 
of  comprehension  of  his  contemporaries.     His  interest   in   his 
Saracen  subjects,  his  adoption  of  their  morals,  and  his  meta- 
physical bent  were  quite  enough  to  give  colour  to  the  Pope's 
charge  of  atheism,  which  is  chiefly  important  because   of  its 

efi'ect  on   the   Christian  world.     The  sympathies  of  Europe 

particularly  of  England,  according  to  Matthew  Paris— went  at 
first  with  Frederick;  other  monarchs  had  been  excommuni- 
cated for  political  causes,  and  the  impression  was  that  Fred- 
erick had  sufi"ered  unjustly.  But  the  early  sympathy  for  his 
cause  was  neutralised  by  the  horror  of  his  opinions,  and  there 
were  many  who  read  Gregory's  encyclical,  believed  it,  and 
changed  their  minds. 

In  1240,  Frederick  definitely   set  to  work   to  destroy   the 


CONTEST  WITH  FREDERICK  STUPOR  MUNDI     173 

States  of  the  Church,  and  his  son  Enzio,  the  King  of  Sardinia, 
was  his  ablest  collaborator.  While  Ancona  and  the  Maritima 
submitted  to  Enzio,  Frederick  marched  on  Rome  and  halted  at 
Viterbo.  The  state  of  things  in  Rome  was  a  remarkable 
testimony  to  the  courage  and  splendour  of  Gregory  IX.  Under- 
mined with  Ghibelline  plots  and  in  deadly  peril,  the  city  rallied 
round  the  aged  Pope  in  the  moment  of  crisis :  his  courage 
recalled  their  pride,  and  his  dignity  inspired  their  awe.  A  Pope 
who  could  calmly  organise  a  procession  to  St.  Peter's  with  the 
enemy  at  his  gates — who,  even  at  the  eleventh  hour,  when  his 
friends  were  deserting,  refused  with  scorn  the  overtures  of  peace 
— was  worthy  of  the  loyalty  of  the  city,  which  hailed  him  as 
another  Leo  the  Great.  Frederick,  distant  only  a  two  days' 
march,  and  daily  welcoming  renegade  Gwelfs  to  his  camp — 
among  them  John  Colonna,  the  mighty  Cardinal  of  San  Prassede 
— laughed  at  the  defenceless  exposure  of  Rome.  But  even  he 
realised  the  change  of  feeling  in  Rome  as  the  crisis  drew  nearer. 
"  Ye  saints  defend  Rome,  whom  the  Romans  would  betray," 
prayed  Gregory  as  he  roused  the  ebbing  courage  of  the  Roman 
crusaders.  Meanwhile,  Europe  made  an  effort  to  come  to  the 
rescue  by  a  great  council  of  arbitration,  which  met  with  the 
approval  of  the  Pope.  Frederick,  who  feared  the  consequences 
of  delay,  opposed  it  with  all  his  might,  and  wrote  strongly 
dissuasive  letters  to  the  Bishops,  endeavouring  to  discourage 
them  with  dismal  stories  of  the  hygienic  conditions  of  Rome. 

A  hundred  intrepid  priests,  among  them  the  abbots  of  Cluny, 
Citeaux,  and  Clairvaux,  embarked  at  Genoa  in  spite  of  the 
Imperial  warning.  With  outragous  indiscretion,  Frederick's 
admiral  sailed  against  them,  defeated  them  ofif  Monte  Christo, 
and  after  being  kept  at  sea  for  three  weeks  under  terrible 
privation,  they  were  "  heaped  together  like  pigs "  in  prison. 
The  capture  of  the  priests  was  not  merely  an  ecclesiastical 
enormity ;  it  was  also  a  political  blunder,  for  it  outraged  the 
feelings  of  every  Churchman  in  Europe.  Frederick's  "  sacrilege  " 
confirmed  the  worst  impressions  which  Gregory's  encyclical  had 
made.  His  refusal  to  suspend  hostilities,  in  response  to  the 
Pope's  appeal  for  a  Crusade  against  the  Tartars,  still  further 
incriminated  him.  Gregory  pleaded  for  the  deliverance  of 
Russia  from  this  sudden  and  terrible  scourge,  which  swept  down 
with  a  shock  of  fury,  recalling  the  apparition  of  the  Huns. 
But  Frederick  insisted  on  pursuing  the  war.  He  saw  his 
enemy  within  his  grasp,  and  he  was  not  inclined  to  lose  his  hold. 
Gregory  was  very  old — over  a  hundred,  according  to  the  chron- 
iclers— and    the   terrible    excitement   of  Frederick's    approach 


174  A  SHOBT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

overwhelmed  him.  He  died  in  the  August  of  1241,  gladdened 
by  the  stolid  fidelity  of  his  city,  with  the  renegade  Cardinal 
victorious  at  its  gates. 

Frederick  instantly  ceased  all  hostilities  in  order  to  show 
that  his  quarrel  was  with  Gregory  IX.  and  not  with  the  Papacy 
as  such  or  with  the  Romans.  The  old  and  decrepid  Celestine  IV. 
reigned  for  seventeen  days  and  died,  leaving  a  vacancy  of 
nearly  two  years  before  the  next  Pope  was  elected.  The 
Cardinals  forsook  Rome,  and  the  Senator  Matthew  Rubeus 
assumed  the  leadership  in  the  interval.  Frederick  made  no 
attempt  to  attack  Rome,  but  the  Romans  took  the  initiative 
against  him  by  attacking  Tivoli  and  assaulting  the  Imperialist 
Cardinals.  Frederick  retaliated  by  besieging  Rome,  but  in  1243 
he  returned  to  Sicily.  In  the  same  year  the  Genoese  Innocent  IV. 
was  elected  to  the  Papacy.  "  I  have  lost  a  good  friend  among 
the  Cardinals,"  Frederick  is  reported  to  have  said,  "since  no 
Pope  can  be  a  Ghibelline ".  The  forecast  was  truer  than  he 
realised,  for  the  honest  and  high-handed  opposition  of  Gregory  IX. 
was  replaced  by  the  duplicity  and  craft  of  a  man  of  many 
wiles. 

A  rebellion  of  imperial  Viterbo,  which  was  surreptitiously 
encouraged  by  Innocent,  led  to  a  renewal  of  hostilities,  and  the 
severe  defeat  of  Frederick's  forces  led  him  to  sue  for  peace. 
The  terms  which  Innocent  imposed  were  extremely  humiliating. 
Frederick  was  to  restore  the  entire  state  of  the  Church,  to 
recognise  the  absolute  spiritual  power  over  princes,  and  to  grant 
an  amnesty  to  the  Pope's  adherents.  The  treaty,  duly  signed 
and  sanctioned,  was  sold  about  Rome  as  a  popular  pamphlet,  in 
proof  of  the  papal  victory. 

Meanwhile,  Innocent  had  a  deeper  plan  in  reserve  behind  his 
negotiations  with  the  Emperor.  He  first  strengthened  the  Curia 
with  ten  new  Gwelfic  Cardinals.  He  then  opened  private 
communications  with  Genoa,  his  native  city.  At  a  convenient 
moment  he  contrived  to  receive  a  report  of  the  approach  of 
fictitious  Imperial  cavalry,  which  gave  him  a  pretext  for  flight. 
Innocent  now  became  once  more  the  warrior  Count  of  his  earlier 
career.  He  rode  full  pace  for  Civita  Vecchia,  leaving  his 
exhausted  train  of  Cardinals  to  follow  at  a  less  extravagant  pace 
behind.  At  Civita  Vecchia  a  Genoese  fleet  met  the  quasi-refugees, 
and  carried  them  to  Genoa  where  they  were  hailed  with  delight. 
They  disembarked  with  almost  hilarious  self-congratulation, 
singing  as  they  passed  through  the  streets,  "  Our  soul  is  escaped 
from  the  snare  of  the  fowler,  the  net  is  broken  and  we  are  free  ". 
The  words  of  the  psalmist  could  not  have  been  more  felicitously 


CONTEST  WITH  FKEDEEICK  STUPOK  MUNDI    175 

chosen,  for  they  conveyed  exactly  the  impression  which  Innocent 
had  intended.  The  flight  of  the  Pope  argued  that  the  Emperor 
was  in  pursuit ;  Innocent  had  fled  before  the  aggression  of 
Frederick,  and  Europe  applauded  the  energy  and  spirit  of  his 
night  ride,  without  detecting  the  masquerade. 

From  Genoa,  Innocent  went  to  Lyons,  where  he  summoned 
an  oecumenical  council  for  the  summer  of  1245.  Only  141 
priests — mostly  French — obeyed  the  summons,  but  these  were 
held  to  be  sufficient  to  carry  through  the  papal  agenda.  Of  the 
"Five  troubles"  which  Innocent  brought  forward,  the  last  was 
the  one  which  absorbed  the  assembly,  the  condemnation  of  the 
Emperor.  Frederick  had  been  invited  to  attend,  but  he  preferred 
to  send  Thaddeus  of  Suessa,  one  of  his  ablest  friends,  to 
represent  him.  His  condemnation  was,  however,  a  foregone 
conclusion,  and  it  was  carried  through  in  July,  after  a  short  and 
inadequate  respite  which  was  granted  in  response  to  Frederick's 
request.  Frederick  was  excommunicated  and  deposed,  and  his 
advocate  beat  his  breast  and  retired.  The  decree  of  Lyons  is, 
after  Canossa,  the  greatest  landmark  in  mediaeval  history.  From 
the  Imperial  standpoint  it  was  far  more  ominous,  for  it  marked 
the  downfall  of  the  Hohenstaufen  dynasty,  which  gave  to  the 
Empire  its  strongest  rulers  and  its  most  ambitious  aim.  The 
brilliant  attempt  of  Frederick  II.  to  realise  his  dream  of  Italian 
monarchy  was  a  last  desperate  effort  to  bring  the  soaring  Papacy 
to  earth.  With  the  decree  of  Lyons  ended  all  reasonable 
prospect  of  success. 

Frederick  did  not,  of  course,  submit  without  a  protest,  and 
his  second  and  more  famous  manifesto  is  a  masterly  summary 
of  the  whole  situation  from  the  Ghibelline  standpoint.  He 
points  to  his  personal  grievances  as  a  warning  to  all  princes — 
"I  am  not  the  first,  nor  shall  I  be  the  last,  whom  the  abuse  of 
sacerdotal  power  seeks  to  hurl  from  the  throne  ".  He  pleads 
the  illegality  of  his  trial,  and  expresses,  perhaps  with  ex- 
aggerated emphasis,  his  disregard  of  the  curse.  "  Do  not  believe, 
however,  that  the  sentence  of  the  Pope  can  bend  my  lofty  spirit. 
My  conscience  is  clean ;  God  is  with  me.  I  call  Him  to 
witness :  it  has  always  been  my  desire  to  lead  back  the  priests 
of  every  class,  especially  those  in  high  position,  to  the  humility 
of  Our  Lord  and  to  the  system  of  the  pure  primitive  Church." 
This  brings  him  to  his  positive  position,  the  outcry  for  reform. 

The  counter-manifesto  of  Innocent  is  equally  inclusive  and 
fundamental.  He  states  clearly  and  unhesitatingly  the  theory 
of  spiritual  power,  according  to  Hildebrand  and  Innocent  III., 
without  attempting  to  gloss  over  or  minimise  the  most  extreme 


176    A  SHOKT  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

pretensions  upon  which  the  quarrel  with  Frederick  had  turned. 
His  reply  to  Frederick's  accusation  of  worldliness  is  striking : 
he  acknowledges  that  "  poverty  of  spirit  is  difficult  to  preserve 
in  the  superabundance  of  wealth,"  but  he  protests  that  "not  the 
use,  but  the  abuse,  of  wealth  is  sinful ". 

Unlike  the  contest  between  Gregory  VH.  and  Henry  IV.,  the 
condemnation  of  Lyons  made  a  profound  impression  on  Europe 
at  large.  Opinions  were  loudly  expressed  on  both  sides.  One 
man  alone  tried  to  mediate,  and  he  was  a  saint.  If  anything  is 
needed  to  convince  us  that  right  was  not  wholly  on  one  side, 
nor  justice  confined  to  either  cause,  the  attempt  of  Louis  IX.  to 
arbitrate  supplies  the  proof.  Innocent  IV.  met  him  at  Cluny, 
and  Frederick  expressed  to  him  his  willingness  to  submit  him- 
self to  examination  for  heresy  before  the  Archbishop  of  Palermo. 
But  things  had  already  gone  too  far :  to  imagine  that  peace 
could  be  restored  between  two  such  combatants  by  the  solution 
of  a  metaphysical  problem  was  the  suggestion  of  a  saint  rather 
than  that  of  a  diplomatist. 

The  cause  of  Frederick  won  a  certain  amount  of  sympathy 
in  England  and  in  France.  A  letter  of  complaint  from  England 
to  the  Council  and  an  anti-clerical  league  of  nobles  in  France 
gave  evidence  of  sympathy  with  the  Emperor's  views  on  reform. 
But  he  had  utterly  failed  to  persuade  the  kings  that  his  cause 
was  their  own.  The  Papacy  was  more  real  to  the  world  at  large 
than  the  Empire :  to  the  Popes  the  National  Churches  largely 
owed  their  original  existence,  and  the  idea  of  Catholic  unity  was 
still  a  power  and  an  inspiration.  Political  conditions  were  also 
in  favour  of  the  Papacy.  Frederick  had  alienated  Germany 
long  ago  by  his  concentration  on  the  afi'airs  of  Italy.  England 
was  ruled  by  the  weak  and  priest-ridden  Henry  III.,  and  the 
King  of  France  was  a  typical  Catholic  saint. 

The  struggle  which  followed  the  edict  was  unworthy  of  both 
sides.  Innocent  employed  all  the  artifices  of  diplomacy  against 
Frederick.  He  encouraged  the  revolt  of  his  subjects,  and  even 
tried  to  seduce  his  son  Conrad  from  his  allegiance.  He  preached 
a  Crusade  against  him,  emphasising  his  Saracen  leanings  and 
disregarding  the  profession  of  faith  which  Frederick  had  sent 
him  He  united  the  forces  of  discontent  in  Sicily,  and  allowed 
his  legate  to  conspire  with  a  handful  of  nobles  against  the 
Emperor's  life.  Frederick,  on  his  side,  burned  the  bearers  of 
papal  bulls  in  Sicily,  and  condemned  as  heretics  all  who  denied 
his  own  absolute  supremacy  over  the  Church.  He  claimed  to 
be  the  Vicar  of  Chirist,  the  lay-pope,  worthy  of  adoration  like  the 
emperors  of  old.     Meanwhile  his  son  Enzio,  and  Eccelin,  the 


CONTEST  WITH  FEEDEEICK  STUPOE  MUNDI    177 

tyrant  of  the  House  of  Romano,  were  crushing  out  the  Gwelfs  in 
North  Italy.     Encouraged  by  these  Ghibelline  successes,  Fred- 
erick made  up  his  mind  to  march  on  Lyons  and  prove  his  right 
in  pitched  battle  before  the  world.     But,  on  his  way,  he  turned 
aside  to  punish  Parma,  which  offered  a  vigorous  resistance,  and 
detained  him,  to  his  surprise,  for  the  whole  winter.     Still  more 
unexpectedly,  a   sudden   sortie  from   the   town   destroyed   the 
Emperor's  camp  and  completely  defeated   him.     One  disaster 
followed  another.     In  May,  1249,  his  faithful  and   chivalrous 
young  son,  Enzio,  fell  into  the  hands  of  his  enemies  and  lan- 
guished for  twenty-two  years  in  prison.     Thaddeus  of  Suessa  had 
already  been  killed  at  Parma;  finally,  Peter  della  Vigna  fell,  like 
Boethius,  a  victiiii  to  his  master's  own  suspicion.     The  death  of 
Peter  may  be  an  indication  of  the  inner  fear  of  the  papal  con- 
demnation, which  Frederick  could  not  altogether  throw  off,  or  it 
may  be  accounted  for  by  the  sudden  moral  collapse  of  lost  hope. 
In  either  case,  it  stains  a  career  otherwise  honourable  in  friend- 
ship, and  sadly  and  disappointingly  closes  it.     Frederick  died  in 
December,    1250,    at    Fiorentino — in    peace,  according    to    the 
more   friendly  chroniclers,   clothed  in  a  Cistercian  habit   and 
absolved   by  his   devoted   friend,  the  Archbishop  of  Palermo. 
Never  did  such  brilliant  gifts  achieve  so  little  and  yet  stand  for 
such  supreme  negative  importance.     With  him  fell  the  Holy 
Roman  Empire  in  the  splendour  of  its  world-wide  power.     It 
rose  again  under  different  conditions,  but  it  is  henceforth  an 
anachronism,  deriving  its  vigour  from  the  Teutonic  monarchy 
which  superseded  it,  and  whose  interests  were,  if  not  antagonistic, 
at   least   incompatible  with   its  fullest    development.     A  sym- 
pathetic modern  character  sketch  of  Frederick  gives  two  main 
reasons  why,  with  all  his  powers  of  mind  and  personality,  he 
failed  to   affect  his    age  except  as  an  undermining  influence. 
The  first  was  his  lack  of  nationality.     "  There  was  no  national 
or  local  cause  of  which  he  could  be  looked  on  as  the  champion. 
There  was  no  nation,  no  province,  no  city  which  could  claim 
him  as  its  own  peculiar  hero."     Deeper  still  was  his  lack  of 
mental  contemporaries.     "  A  man  who  showed  no  condescension 
to  the  feelings  of  his  age,  whether  good  or  evil,  could  not  directly 
influence  that  age.  .  .  .  Direct  influence  on  the  world  of  his 
own  age  he  had  none.     He  may  have  undermined  a  stately 
edifice  which  was  still  to  survive  for  ages ;  but  he  simply  under- 
mined.    He   left  no  traces  of  himself  in  the  character  of  a 
founder ;   he  left  as  few  in  the  character  of  an  open  and  avowed 
destroyer." 

12 


CHAPTER  XVII 

THE  LAST  STRUGGLE  WITH  THE  HOHENSTAUFEN  AND 
THE  COMING  OF  THE  FRENCH,  a.d.  1251-1276 

FOR  four  more  years  Innocent  carried  on  the  quarrel  with 
the  two  sons  to  whom  Frederick  had  bequeathed  his 
cause,  Manfred,  the  bastard  Prince  of  Taranto,  and 
Conrad,  the  legitimate  heir  to  the  kingdom.  Manfred,  the  hero 
of  chivalry  and  romance,  inherited  his  father's  talent  and 
charm,  together  with  his  ill-fortune.  Conrad  was  hardly  more 
than  a  boy  and  his  career  was  too  short  to  show  more  than 
promise.  A  series  of  victories  in  1252  enabled  him  to  enter  his 
capital  victorious  in  1253.  In  1254,  Innocent  excommunicated 
him  and  offered  liis  crown  to  the  infant  son  of  Henry  III.  of 
England.  The  Pope  had  traded  on  the  credulity  of  Henry,  re- 
presenting the  King  of  Sicily  as  a  prodigy  of  vice,  and  extorting 
large  sums  from  the  English  exchequer  for  the  expenses  of  the 
Sicilian  wars.  But  in  May,  Conrad  died,  leaving  his  crown  to 
his  infant  son  Conradin,  whom  he  optimistically  placed  in  the 
guardianship  of  the  Pope.  The  regency  was  entrusted  to  Ber- 
thold  of  Regensburg,  but  he  soon  relinquished  it  with  relief  to 
Manfred,  who  was  the  obvious  person  to  protect  the  rights  of  his 
nephew.  Manfred  found  himself  obliged  to  take  an  oath  of 
vassalage  to  Innocent,  "without  prejudice  to  the  rights  of  the 
child  Conradin,"  and  to  follow  up  the  homage  by  conducting 
Innocent  in  state  into  the  kingdom.  But  Manfred  and  Innocent 
understood  one  another  perfectly.  The  Pope  knew  that  Manfred's 
submission  was  merely  a  means  of  tiding  over  an  awkward 
moment,  and  Manfred  realised  that  Innocent  was  still  negotiat- 
ing with  England.  The  episode  terminated  in  the  sudden  flight 
of  Manfred  and  his  defeat  of  the  papal  forces  at  Lucera.  In  the 
last  month  of  the  year  Innocent  IV.  died  at  Naples,  exhausted 
by  his  long  struggle  against  Frederick  and  his  House.  His 
energy  was  phenomenal,  and  his  power  of  overriding  obstacles 
made  him  an  even  more  formidable  antagonist  than  Gregory 
IX.     And  yet,  in  the  history  of  the  relations  of  the  Papacy 

178 


LAST  STRUGGLE  WITH  THE  HOHENSTAUFEN     179 

with  the  national  Churches,  the  pontificate  of  Innocent  IV.  is 
singularly  unfortunate.  It  marks  the  beginning  of  the  period 
when  oppression  supplants  impression.  The  war  with  the 
Hohenstaufens  made  money  the  first  object  of  papal  policy, 
and  the  exactions  of  Innocent  had  not  the  justification  of 
serving  a  great  aim.  The  so-called  Pragmatic  Sanction  of  St. 
Louis,  although  it  is  a  forgery  of  fifteenth  century  Protestantism, 
is  not  altogether  groundless,  and  it  indicates  the  critical  attitude 
with  which  the  most  devoted  of  Churchmen  regarded  the  abuses 
of  the  political  Papacy.  The  opposition  of  Robert  Grostete  gives 
a  corresponding  illustration  of  the  attitude  of  the  English  Church. 
The  outcry  against  clerical  abuses  comes  no  longer  from  the 
Papacy  itself,  as  in  the  time  of  Innocent  III.,  but  from  indepen- 
dent Churchmen,  supported  by  national  sentiment.  The  protest 
against  papal  exactions  is  included  in  the  programme  of  reform, 
and  the  union  of  the  two  forces  is  the  foundation  of  Protes- 
tantism. In  England  an  unfortunate  coincidence  between  the 
interests  of  the  Crown  and  the  Papacy,  in  connection  with  Sicily, 
joined  the  movements  of  ecclesiastical  reform  and  papal  re- 
sistance to  the  third  and  more  vital  cause  of  nationality  against 
incompetent  monarchy.  The  policy  of  Innocent  IV.  gave  to  the 
English  rebellion  of  1258  a  definitely  anti-papal  character,  and 
henceforth  the  English  national  attitude  to  the  Papacy  is  habitu- 
ally defensive  and  intermittently  hostile. 

The  successor  of  Innocent  IV.  was  almost  a  complete  con- 
trast to  his  predecessor.  Matthew  Paris,  the  English  chronicler, 
describes  him  as  "  kindly  and  pious,  assiduous  in  prayer  and 
strenuously  ascetic,  but  easily  moved  by  flatterers  and  inclined 
to  avarice  ".  From  other  sources  we  learn  that  Alexander  IV. 
was  fat,  good-humoured,  and  easy-going.  The  character  sketches 
of  mediaeval  chroniclers  often  tell  us  more  by  what  they  leave 
out  than  by  the  qualities  which  they  enumerate.  The  most 
obvious  characteristic  of  Alexander  was  his  lack  of  intellect ;  he 
was  a  simple,  unpretentious  soul,  who  tried  to  follow  in  the  steps 
of  his  predecessor  and  utterly  failed  to  manipulate  the  delicate 
weapons  which  he  found  ready  for  his  use.  His  chief  aim  was 
to  keep  on  gooi  terms  with  everyone.  He  made  overtures  to 
Manfred,  and  announced  his  benevolent  intentions  to  Conradin's 
guardians ;  he  confirmed  Edmund  of  England's  enfeoffment  at 
the  same  time,  and  translated  Henry  III.'s  crusading  vow  into 
the  duty  of  conquering  Sicily.  He  merely  succeeded  in  loosen- 
ing the  whole  diplomatic  system  which  Innocent  IV.  had  woven 
round  the  Papacy. 

The  only  result  of  the  Pope's  flabby  duplicity  was  to  irritate 


180  A  8H0ET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

Manfred  into  decisive  action.  In  1258,  he  crowned  himself 
King  of  Sicily,  in  deliberate  disregard  of  the  rights  of  Conradin. 
If  ever  usurpation  was  justifiable,  it  was  so  in  this  case,  for  the 
struggle  to  keep  an  absent  child  on  the  throne  of  Sicily  was 
hopeless  from  the  first.  But  the  kingship  of  the  Sicilies  was 
only  the  stepping-stone  to  Manfred's  larger  ambition.  He  openly 
announced  his  intention  of  conquering  the  whole  of  Italy  and 
uniting  it  in  his  own  person.  The  Tuscan  county  had  already 
submitted  to  him  and  his  victory  of  Arbia  gave  him  Florence. 
But  his  strongest  allies  were  the  Arab  forces  of  the  Mohammedan 
colony  at  Lucera,  whose  devotion  and  stability  were  a  legacy  from 
Frederick  the  Wonderful.  Against  these  invaluable  servants  of 
the  Hohenstaufen — said  by  Matthew  Paris  to  have  numbered 
60,000  fighting  men — all  the  efforts  of  the  last  three  Popes 
had  failed.  Excommunications,  persecutions,  and  mendicant 
missions  left  them  perfectly  unmoved,  and  Alexander  IV. 's 
efforts  to  expel  them  from  Italy  were  equally  unavailing.  They 
remained  firmly  rooted  in  the  land,  and  finally  contributed  to 
the  racial  homogeneity  of  southern  Italy. 

Meanwhile  the  German  crown  was  being  tossed  about  among 
foreign  princes,  among  whom  Richard  of  Cornwall  and  Alfonso 
of  Castile  were  the  only  serious  competitors.  No  one  took  the 
child  Conradin  into  consideration  except  the  Pope,  who  saw  in 
his  weakness  the  chief  hope  of  regaining  unrivalled  supremacy 
in  Italy.  Alexander  therefore  instigated  the  Florentine  Gwelfs 
to  appeal  to  Conradin's  guardians,  and  formed  in  the  boy's  name 
an  Umbrian  league  in  opposition  to  the  Tuscan  league  of  Man- 
fred. Before,  however,  he  could  carry  this  policy  forward, 
Alexander  died  at  Viterbo  in  May,  1261. 

Inconspicuous  as  it  was  in  Italian  policy,  the  pontificate  of 
Alexander  was  an  epoch  in  the  city  of  Rome.  During  the 
absence  of  his  predecessor  from  the  city,  the  great  Bolognese 
Brancaleone  d'Andolo  had  at  last  planted  in  Rome  the  seeds  of 
industrial  organisation  on  the  lines  laid  down  by  successful 
communes.  Alexander  returned,  in  1255,  to  a  new  Rome,  swept 
and  garnished  by  the  wisdom  of  Brancaleone,  but,  as  Pope,  he 
cordially  disapproved  of  the  change.  His  stay  in  the  city  was 
stormy  and  brief.  He  was  almost  a  cypher  in  the  hands  of  the 
Gwelfic  nobility,  who  instantly  compassed  the  fall  and  banish- 
ment of  Brancaleone,  but  were  unable  to  prevent  his  return  on 
the  tide  of  reaction  two  years  later.  On  his  restoration  to  power 
the  great  popular  leader  made  an  alliance  in  the  name  of  the 
Romans  with  Manfred.  Alexander  tried  his  spiritual  weapons, 
but  the  Ghibelhnes  rendered  these  powerless  by  threatening  to 


LAST  STRUGGLE  WITH  THE  HOHENSTAUFEN     181 

destroy  papal  Anagni  unless  the  ban  was  removed  from  their 
hero.  The  death  of  Brancaleone  in  1258  left  Rome  to  fall  back 
into  the  state  of  industrial  chaos  from  which  he  had  partially 
rescued  it.  There  is  no  aspect  of  Papal  history  more  unhappy 
than  the  relations  between  the  Popes  and  the  city  of  Rome,  and 
there  is  nothing  which  it  is  harder  to  forgive  the  great  political 
Popes  than  their  relentless  Buppreesion  of  every  poor  effort  to- 
wards freedom  which  the  city  ever  made.  The  old  fallacy  by 
which  tyranny  always  tries  to  justify  itself — that  those  who  are 
oppressed  are  incapable  of  freedom — is  the  only  apology  which 
it  is  possible  to  bring  forward,  and  its  inadequacy  was  never  more 
pitifully  made  clear. 

The  Monk  of  Padua,  writing  under  Alexander's  pontificate, 
gives  a  terrible  picture  of  the  suflfering  which  the  Hohenstaufen 
struggle  had  brought  on  Italy.  "  My  soul  shudders  to  describe 
the  sufferings  of  the  time,  for  it  is  now  twenty  years  since 
the  blood  of  Italy  flowed  like  a  stream  on  account  of  the  discord 
between  Church  and  Empire."  The  thirteenth  century  was 
essentially  an  age  of  contrast,  of  high  lights  and  dark  shadows, 
and  at  this  particular  moment  the  shadows  were  the  more  con- 
spicuous. The  fall  of  the  tyrant  house  of  Romano  gives  a  strange 
and  bizarre  impression,  which  is  not  uncharacteristic.  Ezzelino, 
the  son-in-law  of  ^Frederick  and  the  bulwark  of  the  Ghibelline 
cause  in  Central  Italy,  was  the  Nero  of  his  times.  His  fantastic 
cruelty,  amounting  to  madness,  was  expiated  in  captivity  in  his 
castle  at  Soneiro,  where  the  people  gazed  at  him  "  as  at  an  owl " 
through  the  bars  of  his  dungeon,  with  hatred  tinged  with  awe 
for  his  monstrous  wickedness.  His  brother  Alberic  was  dragged 
to  death  by  wild  horses  after  seeing  his  sons  strangled  in  his 
arms.  We  shudder  at  the  terrible  working  of  the  mediaeval  con- 
science,  which  demanded  retribution  to  the  uttermost  farthing, 
and  carried  the  principle  of  "  an  eye  for  an  eye  "  to  such  an  ap- 
paling  conclusion.  Simultaneously  with  the  fall  of  the  House 
of  Romano  one  of  the  strangest  phenomena  of  the  Middle  Ages 
made  its  appearance  in  Italy.  A  sudden  outburst  of  asceticism, 
the  product  of  acute  distress,  found  expression  in  the  rise  of  the 
Flagellants.  Crowds  of  priests  and  friars,  knights  and  burghers, 
men,  women,  and  children,  scourged  themselves  through  the 
streets  of  the  cities  of  Umbria  crying :  "  Peace,  peace !  Lord, 
give  us  peace ! "  In  its  origin,  a  pure  and  touching  and  very 
mediaeval  appeal  to  penitence,  as  the  one  hope  of  the  desolate, 
the  movement  spread  with  extraordinary  rapidity,  lost  its  sin- 
cerity, and  by  the  time  it  reached  Rome,  in  1260,  degenerated 
ijito  mad  fanaticism.     The  contemporary  chroniclers  speak  of 


182  A  SHOET  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

the  Flagellant  movement  with  amazement  and  later  ones  with 
ridicule  ;  it  remains  for  history  a  pathetic  expression  of  national 
misery,  and  a  striking  testimony  to  the  nearness  of  religion  to 
daily  life  in  the  thirteenth  century. 

The  new  Pope,  Urban  IV., ^  was  the  son  of  a  French  shoe- 
maker, an  astute  man  of  petty  ideals  and  of  common-place 
mind.  He  saw  at  once  the  fruitlessness  of  the  attempt  of  his 
predecessors  to  draw  England  into  Italian  politics.  We  had 
already  established  our  reputation  as  an  insular  nation.  More- 
over, the  Crown  had  been  thoroughly  weakened  by  the  Provisions 
of  Oxford,  and  the  country  was  already  up  in  arms  against  ad- 
ditional taxation.  So  Urban  turned  to  France,  his  own  country, 
and  inaugurated  the  philo-Frankish  policy,  which  was  to  bring 
the  Papacy  to  such  deep  abasement  in  the  next  generation.  He 
invited  Charles  of  Anjou,  the  brother  of  St.  Louis,  to  come  and 
re-enact  the  part  of  Charles  the  Great,  and  deliver  the  Papacy 
from  its  enemies.  Louis  IX.  was  relieved  to  find  an  outlet  for 
the  superabundant  energies  of  his  younger  brother.  Accord- 
ingly, Charles  prepared  for  an  Italian  expedition,  and  became 
Senator  of  Rome  in  1263. 

Urban  meanwhile  remained  at  Orvieto  on  bad  terms  with 
Rome  and  filled  with  anxiety  as  to  the  issue  of  his  policy.  Had 
he  merely  introduced  another  competitor  into  the  overcrowded 
arena  ?  The  best  thing  to  hope  for  was  that  Charles  and  Man- 
fred, brilliant  and  knightly  warriors  both,  should  exhaust  each 
other  in  the  struggle  and  leave  the  spoils  to  the  Pope.  After 
fruitless  attempts  to  negotiate  with  Urban,  Manfred  sent  an  ex- 
pedition to  Rome  under  one  of  his  best  generals,  Peter  of  Vico. 
It  failed,  owing  to  the  strength  of  the  Gwelfs  in  the  city,  although 
Urban's  position  was  decidedly  hazardous.  In  1264  the  French 
Pope  died  at  Orvieto,  never  having  once  entered  the  Holy  City. 
His  work,  such  as  it  was,  had  been  thoroughly  accomplished. 
He  had  entirely  Gallicanised  the  Papal  Court.  He  sur- 
rounded himself  with  French  officials,  and  created  several 
French  Cardinals.  If  his  motives  were  political,  they  were 
justified  by  their  results.  The  French  Bishops  whom  Urban 
gathered  round  him  were  almost  all  men  of  conspicuous  emi- 
nence, and  the  great  Churchmen  who  were  drawn  from  the 
France  of  St,  Louis  were  men  who  would  raise  the  standard  of 
any  hierarchy.  Among  them,  none  was  held  in  higher  esteem 
than  Guy  Foulquois,  Bishop  of  Puy  and  Archbishop  of  Narbonne. 

The  successor   of   Urban   IV.,   elected    after  four  months' 

nm-H, 


LAST  STKUGGLE  WITH  THE  HOHENSTAUFEN      183 

vacancy,  was  a  man  of  stainless  character  and  commanding 
personality.  Guy  Foulquois  had  spent  the  greater  part  of  his 
life  as  a  lawyer  and  a  layman.  He  had  been  a  councillor  of 
Louis  IX.,  who  valued  him  so  highly  that  he  dissuaded  him 
from  becoming  a  monk  after  his  wife's  death.  He  was  how- 
ever ordained,  and  lived  for  a  time  according  to  the  Carthusian 
rule.  His  life  in  the  world  left  no  stain  of  ambition  on  his 
pastoral  career.  He  became  Bishop  of  Puy  in  obedience  to  a 
strong  sense  of  duty,  accepted  a  Cardinalate  under  pressure, 
and  wept  when  he  was  made  Pope.  He  was  elected  during  his 
absence  in  England,  where  he  had  been  sent,  as  a  man  renowned 
for  his  integrity,  to  arbitrate  between  the  Crown  and  the  baron- 
age. There  is  a  story  that  he  travelled  in  disguise  as  a  mendi- 
cant as  far  as  Perugia,  where  the  Curia  met  him  and  conducted 
him  in  pomp  to  Viterbo. 

Guy  Foulquois  took  the  name  of  Clement  IV.  His  pontificate 
restores  one's  faith  in  the  inherent  possibilities  of  the  mediaeval 
Papacy.  No  trace  of  avarice  or  nepotism  spoils  the  perfection 
of  his  self-devotion.  'A  man,  stern  to  himself  and  gentle  to 
others,"  is  the  pleasing  verdict  of  a  contemporary.  And  yet  he 
pursued  the  quarrel  with  Manfred  with  the  same  vigour  as  his 
more  worldly  predecessors.  He  taxed  Europe  for  the  Sicilian 
war.  and  urged  Charles  of  Anjou  to  hasten  his  preparations  for 
the  French  expedition.  The  character  of  Clement — perfectly 
sincere,  disinterested,  and  dutiful — convinces  us  of  the  inevita- 
bility of  the  Hohenstaufen  struggle.  Other  Popes  may  have 
been  carried  away  by  personal  ambition,  by  passionate  hostility, 
or  the  fascinations  of  intrigue,  but  Guy  Foulquois  was  above 
these  things ;  nothing  but  a  belief  that  the  supremacy  of  the 
Papacy  in  Italy  was  indispensable  to  the  highest  good  of 
Catholic  unity  would  have  induced  him  to  prolong  the  troubles 
of  Italy. 

Clement  IV.  very  soon  grasped  one  important  point  in  the 
education  of  a  Pope.  His  letter  to  Charles  of  Anjou  shows  how 
well  he  understood  the  Roman  character.  "  The  Romans  demand 
from  their  Rector,"  he  says,  "an  imposing  appearance,  sonorous 
speeches,  and  formidable  actions,  asserting  that  such  are  due  to 
the  sovereignty  of  the  world."  The  difficulty  which  Charles 
found  in  taking  the  Pope's  advice  arose  from  his  lack  of  funds. 
"An  imposing  appearance"  was  a  very  expensive  thing  to 
achieve  in  the  thirteenth  century,  especially  since  Frederick 
Stupor  Mundi,  with  his  elephants  and  his  Saracens,  had  raised 
the  standard  of  pageantry  to  such  an  extravagant  limit.  "  Son- 
orous speeches  "  were  cheap  enough,  but  "  formidable  actions  " 


184  A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

were  a  serious  problem  to  the  penurious  prince,  and  Charles 
had  to  rob  the  Lateran  to  pay  his  way.  Even  then  the  Gwelfs 
remained  dissatisfied,  and  the  Ghibellines  daily  accumulated  in 
the  city.  Prompt  action  was  the  only  hope  for  the  French  ex- 
pedition, and  in  urging  Charles  to  come  quickly,  Clement  knew 
he  could  count  on  his  compliance.  Charles  came,  and  was 
greeted  in  Rome  in  May,  1265,  with  a  tournament,  a  war-dance, 
and  outbursts  of  Gwelfic  loyalty.  He  took  up  his  abode  in  the 
Lateran,  whence  Clement  was  impelled  tactfully  to  remove  him  : 
the  Pope  did  not  allow  his  personal  humility  to  countenance  any 
indignity  to  the  papal  Office.  In  June  a  commission  of  Cardin- 
als invested  Charles  with  the  kingdom  of  the  Two  Sicilies,  and 
in  the  following  January  he  was  crowned,  together  with  his  wife, 
Beatrix,  in  St.  Peter's.  It  was  only  a  paper  sovereignty,  and  it 
was  given  grudgingly  by  the  Pope,  who  began  to  question  the 
sagacity  of  the  French  policy,  now  that  Charles,  the  firebrand, 
was  actually  his  guest.  Had  he  merely  pledged  himself  to  sup- 
port one  master  against  another,  and  was  Charles  any  less 
dangerous  than  Manfred  when  it  came  to  a  question  of  corona- 
tion ?  Anyhow,  it  was  too  late  to  draw  back.  Charles  was  in 
Rome  with  his  army :  Manfred  was  openly  flaunting  his  inten- 
tion of  capturing  not  only  Italy,  but  the  Imperial  Crown.  For  a 
moment  Manfred-  had  hopes  of  winning  over  Clement,  but  the 
coronation  of  Charles  dismissed  them.  One  last  appeal  was 
rejected  with  the  ominous  answer,  "Let  Manfred  know  that  the 
time  for  grace  is  past.  Everything  has  its  time,  but  time  has 
not  everything.  The  hero  in  arms  has  already  issued  from  the 
gate :  the  axe  is  already  laid  to  the  roots." 

The  reason  why  the  hero  had  already  issued  from  the  gates 
was  that  penury  had  driven  him  forth.  The  army  of  Provence 
had  arrived,  and  there  was  no  money  to  maintain  it.  With  his 
usual  impetuosity,  Charles  set  out  at  once  to  conquer  the  king- 
dom. He  drew  up  his  weary  forces  on  the  hills  above  Benevento, 
overlooking  the  plains  where  Manfred's  army  lay  encamped. 
On  February  26, 1266,  the  battle  of  Benevento  summarised  in  one 
great  epic  the  long  struggle  between  the  Papacy  and  the  Hohen- 
staufen.  It  was  one  of  those  brilliant  scenes  which  seem  to  live 
in  history  to  remind  us  that  the  ages  of  chivalry,  known  to  us 
in  legend  and  song,  are  no  mere  poet's  dream — a  fitting  setting 
for  the  legends  of  Arthur  and  the  Round  Table — but  an  historical 
fact.  The  details  of  the  battle  have  been  too  often  described  to 
need  re-telling.  Manfred's  strength  lay  in  his  Saracen  archers,  who 
successfully  repulsed  the  Provencal  infantry.  But  the  ultimate 
victory,  rested  with   the   invincible   cavalry   of  France.      The 


LAST  STRUGGLE  WITH  THE  HOHENSTAUFEN     185 

valiant  German  knights  stood  their  ground  with  sturdy  heroism, 
but  they  were  no  match  for  Charles's  picked  legion,  which  rode 
through  them  with  the  battle-cry  of  "  Montjoie,"  and  put  to  flight 
the  Apulian  forces  in  the  rear.  Charles  wrote  that  evening  to 
inform  the  Pope  of  his  victory  :  "  1  inform  your  Holiness  of  this 
great  victory  in  order  that  you  may  thank  the  Almighty,  Who 
has  granted  it,  and  Who  fights  for  the  cause  of  the  Church  by 
my  army  ". 

Two  days  after  the  battle,  the  captive  counts,  who  were  taken 
at  Benevento,  were  led  across  the  battlefield  in  chains  to  identify 
the  body  of  Manfred.  The  gallant  Jordan  of  Anglano  hid  his 
face  and  wept.  "  0  my  King  ! "  he  cried  in  anguish  as  he  gazed 
on  the  form  of  the  idolised  leader.  By  his  side  lay  the  faithful 
Theobald  Anibaldi,  his  brother-in-arms,  who  had  followed  him  to 
the  death.  The  two  had  plunged  into  the  thick  of  the  fight,  de- 
termined to  die  in  honour  rather  than  to  live  in  shame.  Man- 
fred was  the  type  of  hero  for  whom  men  are  willing  to  die. 
Priests  and  troubadours  fought  over  his  reputation,  the  priests 
loading  him  with  the  guilt  of  crimes  which  he  never  committed, 
and  the  troubadors  extolling  him  in  exaggerated  and  fulsome 
praise.  His  true  greatness  was  recognised  by  the  soldiers  who 
fought  against  him  at  Benevento,  and  saw  him  die.  He  was 
honourably  buried,  but,  of  course,  without  ecclesiastical  rites, 
by  order  of  Charles  of  Anjou,  and  the  French  soldiers,  passing 
the  place  where  his  body  lay,  paid  a  spontaneous  tribute  to  the 
"  preux  chevalier  "  by  each  placing  a  stone  on  his  grave,  leaving 
thus  an  immense  monument  to  mark  it.  Charles  of  Anjou 
sullied  the  glory  of  his  victory  by  the  carnage  whicli  followed  it. 
Clement  IV.  was  appalled  at  the  thoroughness  with  which  his 
work  had  been  done.  "  Such,"  he  cried  in  horror,  "  is  the  re- 
venge of  which  I  approved  the  beginning."  Moreover,  the 
brutality  of  Charles  in  the  hour  of  victory  did  much  to  alienate 
Italy  from  his  cause.  '-Where  are  my  Ghibellines,  on  whom  I 
had  placed  my  hopes?"  Manfred  had  cried  in  bitterness  in 
the  hour  of  defeat.  Now  that  Manfred  was  dead  and  his  infant 
sons  in  captivity,  the  Ghibellines  came  out  of  hiding,  and  looked 
round  for  a  new  leader.  In  Rome  they  were  strong  enough  to 
conduct  a  popular  rebellion,  and  to  force  the  Pope  to  recognise 
as  Senator  Don  Arrigo  of  Castile,  brother  to  Alfonso,  titular 
King  of  the  Romans.  In  Sicily,  the  oppressions  of  the  Angevin 
King  made  the  rule  of  Manfred  seem  mild.  In  Tuscany,  the 
fugitive  remnant  of  Manfred's  party  gathered  together  and 
plotted  with  true  Italian  ingenuity. 

Beyond  the  Alps,    in   a   Swabian    castle,   the    last   of    the 


186  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

Hohenstaufen  was  growing  up  in  a  world  of  dreams,  surrounded 
by  minstrels  who  sang  to  him  of  the  past  glories  of  his  house, 
and  thrilled  his  young  soul  with  stories  of  the  two  Fredericks. 
To  Conradin,  in  his  fifteenth  year,  envoys  came  from  the 
Ghibelline  cities,  summoning  him  to  the  fatal  Hohenstaufen 
mission.  The  enchantment  worked  with  terrible  rapidity.  In 
vain  his  mother  tried  to  hold  him  back ;  her  wisdom  was 
dismissed  as  womanly  weakness  and  hardly  weighed  in  the 
balance  against  the  encouragement  of  the  boy's  uncles.  Conradin 
heard  the  call  of  the  siren  land  and  rushed  headlong  to  his  fate. 
Clement  watched  his  preparations  half  in  pity  and  half  in 
irritation.  He  opened  proceedings  against  him  with  weary 
unconcern,  as  a  matter  of  course,  threatening  his  adherents 
with  excommunication.  "  I  do  not  lay  much  stress  on  the 
envoys  whom  the  Ghibillines  have  sent  to  their  idol,  the  boy 
Conradin,  I  am  too  well  acquainted  with  his  position,"  Clement 
writes;  "it  is  so  pitiable  that  he  can  do  nothing,  either  for 
himself  or  his  adherents  ".  It  was  tiresome  to  have  the  peace 
of  Italy  postponed  by  a  headstrong  boy,  and  Clement's  language 
becomes  more  exasperated  as  the  cause  of  the  young  Hohen- 
staufen gains  strength  in  Italy. 

In  September,  1267,  Conradin  set  out  for  Italy  with  his  uncle 
Duke  Lewis  and-  other  German  nobles.  Young  Frederick  of 
Austria,  like  Conradin,  an  orphan  of  a  fallen  dynasty,  accom- 
panied the  heir  of  the  Hohenstaufen  as  his  sworn  brother.  The 
bond  was  a  reality  in  these  days  of  high  adventure.  Manfred's 
uncle,  Galvan  Lancia,  had  gone  before  Conradin  to  Rome,  and 
against  his  reception  there,  Clement  hurled  an  indignant  protest. 
But  a  Ghibelline  league  between  Tuscany  and  Rome  held  the 
city  faithful  to  the  Hohenstaufen  cause.  Conradin  was  mean- 
while received  with  rapture  at  Pisa  and  Siena,  and  the  victory 
of  his  army  at  Ponte  a  Valle  left  the  road  to  Rome  open  to  him. 
From  Monte  Mario  he  looked  across  in  ecstasy  to  the  arena  of 
Frederick  II.  and  Manfred.  His  magnificent  reception  in  Rome 
still  further  dazzled  the  romantic  boy.  Amid  draperies  and 
jewels  and  dancing  he  was  led  to  the  Capitol  and  acclaimed 
Emperor  of  Rome.  In  August,  1268,  he  set  out  with  a  well- 
equipped  army  to  conquer  Sicily.  At  Tagliacozzo  he  met  the 
forces  of  Charles,  and  the  order  of  the  events  of  the  battle  of 
Benevento  repeated  itself  with  remarkable  consistency.  Conradin 
was  victorious  with  the  first  two  divisions  of  his  army,  but  was 
overtaken  in  the  midst  of  his  exultations  by  the  third  and 
strongest  contingent  of  the  French.  Don  Arrigo,  who  with  his 
Spaniards  was  the  flower  of  Conradin's  army,  had  pursued  the 


LAST  STKUGGLE  WITH  THE  HOHENSTAUFEN     187 

retreating  Angevins  too  far.  He  returned  to  rejoin,  as  he 
thought,  Conradins  victorious  troops,  and  found  himself 
surrounded  by  the  cry  of  "Montjoie"  and  the  banners  of  the 
lilies. 

Charles  announced  his  victory  once  more  to  Clement,  in 
practically  the  same  words  as  he  had  used  two  years  before. 
The  pathetic  story  of  Conradin's  flight  is  too  pitiable  to  dwell 
upon ;  how  the  Romans  turned  their  backs  on  the  fugitive  boy, 
whom  only  a  fortnight  before  they  had  loaded  with  honours  ; 
how  he  fled  in  disguise  to  the  sea,  and  was  captured  by  John 
Frangipani ;  how  he  was  delivered  into  the  hands  of  Charles 
and  executed  at  Naples — this  is  the  epilogue  of  the  Hohenstaufen 
drama.  The  youth  and  innocence  of  Conradin  could  not  save 
him  from  the  ill-fortune  which  dogged  his  House.  Child  as  he 
was,  he  died  like  his  fathers  with  courage  and  dignity,  appealing 
to  the  mercy  of  Heaven  to  mitigate  the  Church's  condemnation. 

The  Hohenstaufen  cause  was  dead.  The  worst  danger  which 
the  political  Papacy  ever  had  to  face  lay  conquered  at  its  feet. 
The  work  of  conquest  had  been  accomplished  at  tremendous 
cost,  and  the  concentration  of  its  energies,  at  the  zenith  of  its 
power,  for  more  than  a  century,  on  a  temporal  struggle  was  a 
disaster  from  which  the  Papacy  never  recovered.  But  neither 
the  political  exhaustion  nor  the  moral  deterioration  made  itself 
felt  immediately,  for  the  work  of  Gregory  VII.  and  Innocent  III. 
took  long  to  undermine.  All  the  elements  out  of  which  the 
Reformation  was  formed  were  traceable  at  the  close  of  the 
thirteenth  century,  but  they  had  hardly  come  to  light,  and  they 
lacked  every  vestige  of  cohesion. 

Within  a  month  of  Conradin's  death,  Clement  IV.  died  at 
Viterbo.  We  cannot  help  wishing  that  he  had  tried  to  save 
Conradin.  He  was  great  enough  to  have  justified  the  hope  that 
he  would  rise  above  his  age  and  be  pitiful  to  so  defenceless  an 
enemy.  It  took  three  years  to  elect  his  successor,  and  the 
Cardinals  were  only  brought  to  the  point  by  the  solicitations  of 
St.  Bonaventura.  In  1271,  Gregory  X.,  of  the  famous  House  of 
Visconti,  was  elected  during  his  absence  in  the  East,  where  he 
was  crusading  with  Edward,  the  heir  of  England.  He  was 
exactly  the  right  man  for  the  work  which  lay  before  him.  He 
was  before  all  things  a  peace-maker,  but  on  the  model  of 
Honorius  III.  rather  than  of  Alexander  IV.  The  chief  work  of  his 
pontificate  was  the  restoration  of  the  Empire,  which  he  realised 
to  be  essential  to  the  order  of  the  Christian  world.  The  candidate 
put  forward  by  the  Germans  was  Rudolf  of  Hapsburg,  a  humble 
supporter  of  the  Hohenstaufen,  whose   insignificance  was  his 


188  A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

chief  qualification  in  the  eyes  of  his  electors.  The  Pope  would 
hardly  have  chosen  a  Ghibelline  Emperor,  but  Gregory  resolved 
to  make  the  best  of  it,  and  get  as  good  terms  as  he  could. 
Rudolf  is  described  as  a  "serious,  unimaginative,  commonplace 
man,"  and  he  was  unlikely  to  cause  the  Popes  much  anxiety. 
He  addressed  Gregory  in  terms  of  becoming  submission :  "  I  fix 
my  hopes  on  thee  and  fall  at  the  feet  of  thy  Holiness,  humbly 
entreating  thee  to  uphold  me  in  the  duty  which  I  have  under- 
taken ". 

Gregory  was  as  brave  as  he  was  pacific.  The  last  two  Popes  had 
never  ventured  to  set  foot  in  Rome  in  the  whole  course  of  their 
pontificate.  Gregory  went  straight  to  the  city  and  did  what  he 
could  to  patronise  the  Gwelf  and  Ghibelline  factions  which  rent  it 
asunder.  He  was  not  very  successful,  either  in  Rome,  where  fac- 
tion fighting  was  endemic,  or  in  Florence,  where  it  had  temporarily 
fired  the  imagination  of  the  city.  But  the  effect  of  his  pacific 
policy  on  Europe  in  restoring  the  ideal  of  peace  was  incalculable. 
The  central  event  of  his  pontificate  was  the  great  Council  of 
Lyons  in  1275.  Here  the  restoration  of  the  Empire  was  confirmed 
in  the  person  of  Rudolf,  and  Alfonso  of  Castile  was  persuaded 
to  forego  his  claims.  Polite  speeches  passed  between  the  envoys 
of  Rudolf  and  Gregory,  and  the  old  and  impossible  relationship 
between  the  "  twin  powers "  was  restored  in  all  its  elaboration 
of  meaningless  metaphor.  Rudolf  naturally  could  not  afi'ord  to 
be  difficult.  He  expressed  his  willingness  to  surrender  the 
sovereignty  of  Sicily,  and  the  imperial  claims  in  Rome  and 
the  Patrimony. 

The  Council  of  Lyons  carried  through  one  other  important 
piece  of  business — it  drew  up  and  passed  the  law  of  Conclave. 
Taught  by  the  exigencies  of  his  own  election,  Gregory  ordained 
that  in  the  future  the  Cardinal-electors  should  be  shut  up  "  with 
one  key "  during  the  election  of  a  Pope,  and  submitted  to  a 
course  of  increasing  privations  until  they  could  come  to  a 
decision.  It  was  hoped  that  the  discomfort  of  the  Cardinals 
would  urge  them  to  brevity,  and  that  their  enclosure  would  cut 
them  ofi"  from  outer  influences.  How  far  it  succeeded  in  secur- 
ing these  objects,  subsequent  history  shows :  repealed  from  time 
to  time,  and  modified  from  its  first  severity,  it  still  survives  as 
an  essential  adjunct  of  papal  administration. 

A  third  incident  of  the  Council  had  a  merely  temporary 
importance,  while  it  seemed  to  the  world  at  large  a  momentous 
event.  This  was  the  formal  union  with  the  Greek  Church, 
which  was  brought  about  by  St.  Bonaventura.  It  was  not  des- 
tined to  last,  but  it  confirmed  the  impression  which  the  reign  of 


LAST  STRUGGLE  WITH  THE  HOHENSTAUFEN     189 

Gregory  had  already  created  as  an  era  of  peace.  In  1276,  on  his 
way  back  from  the  Council,  Gregory  X.  died  at  Arezzo,  old  and 
full  of  honour,  surrounded  by  the  praises  of  the  peace  which  he 
had  made.  The  object  which  lay  nearest  his  heart  remained, 
however,  unfulfilled.  He  was  before  all  things  a  crusader,  and 
the  underlying  motive  of  the  good  which  he  had  wrought  as 
Pope  was  his  zeal  for  the  Holy  War.  The  peace  of  Europe  was 
to  him  a  means  and  not  an  end.  Christendom  received  the  gift 
of  peace  and  praised  the  giver,  but  the  only  payment  which  he 
asked,  it  was  unprepared  to  yield. 


CHAPTER  XVIII 

THE  FALL  OF  THE  MEDIEVAL  PAPACY:   BONIFACE  VHI., 

A.D.  1276-1303 

THE  death  of  Gregory  X.  was  followed  by  an  interlude  of 
short  pontificates  and  growing  unrest.  Of  the  three 
Popes  who  reigned  during  the  year  1276,  the  third  alone 
made  any  impression  on  his  age.  Innocent  V.  and  Hadrian  V. 
died  before  they  had  used  their  powers.  The  Portuguese  John 
XXI  was  an  eccentric  character,  whom  some  of  his  contem- 
poraries regarded  as  a  magician  and  others  as  a  lunatic.  He 
seems  to  have  been  a  mathematician  of  real  ability,  whom 
Gregory  X.  had  esteemed  for  his  learning ;  but  as  Pope  he  was 
undoubtedly  a  failure.  He  was  killed  within  a  year  of  his 
accession  by  a  falling  ceiling  in  his  new  palace  at  Viterbo — an 
end  which  he  was  believed  to  have  brought  upon  himself  by 
his  concourse  with  the  powers  of  evil. 

In  1277  a  series  of  aristocratic  Roman  Popes  began  in  the 
accession  of  Nicholas  III.  (the  son  of  Matthew  Rubeus  of  the 
noble  house  of  Orsini).  His  rule  was  secular  and  able,  and  his 
chief  object  was  to  establish  the  papal  constitution  on  a  more 
satisfactory  basis  in  the  states  of  the  Church.  He  ransacked  the 
archives  and  produced  deeds  of  gift  to  prove  his  rights  in  Romag- 
na  and  Pentapolis.  He  stifled  the  first  hint  of  resistance  from 
the  Emperor  Rudolf  by  promising  him  the  rights  formerly  exer- 
cised by  Charles  of  Anjou  in  Tuscany.  The  so-called  "  tyrants  " 
of  the  Romagna  did  homage  to  Nicholas,  and  the  great  names 
of  Malatesta,  Polentani,  and  Guido  of  Montefeltro  are  heard  in 
harmony  with  those  of  the  Pope  and  his  family.  Even  Bologna 
came  into  the  orbit  of  peace  which  surrounded  Nicholas. 
Finally,  Nicholas  succeeded  in  combining  the  Senatorship  with 
the  papal  power.  He  could  not  personally  hold  the  office,  but  he 
gave  it  to  his  brother  and  so  paved  the  way  for  later  popes  to  go 
further  and  unite  the  two  offices  in  one.  His  last  act  of  pacifi- 
cation brought  Charles  and  Rudolf  to  terms  with  one  another, 
and  so  left  Europe  free  for  the  time  being  from  an  Imperial 
struggle.  Nicholas  died  in  1280,  leaving  a  singularly  complete 
record  behind  him.      His  aims  and  his  interests  were  frankly 

190 


THE  FALL  OF  THE  MEDIAEVAL  PAPACY      191 

secular,  and  he  has  often  been  arraigned  as  the  founder  of 
nepotism.  But  what  he  did,  he  did  thoroughly,  and  his  peace 
policy  was  more  beneficial  to  Italy  than  many  a  more  idealistic 
effort. 

The  reign  of  Martin  IV.,  a  Frenchman  of  low  birth  (1281-1285), 
was  a  reversion  to  the  French  domination.  French  influence 
once  more  pervaded  and  governed  the  Curia,  with  deplorable 
consequences  for  the  Papacy.  The  hostility  to  the  French, 
which  had  long  been  smouldering  in  Sicily,  broke  out  in  1282 
in  the  eruption  named  the  Sicilian  Vespers.  The  assassina- 
tion of  the  whole  French  population  of  the  island  evoked  an 
outcry  of  vengeance  from  Charles,  which  found  an  echo  in  his 
faithful  servant  the  Pope.  A  Ghibelline  reaction  in  Italy  and  a 
rising  in  Rome  crippled  Martin's  power  of  action.  Before 
Charles  could  put  his  threats  into  effect  he  died,  leaving  his  son 
and  heir  a  prisoner  in  the  hands  of  Peter  of  Aragon,  who  had 
taken  advantage  of  the  general  unrest  to  seize  the  Sicilian  crown. 
In  the  same  year  Martin  followed  his  master  to  the  grave. 

Under  Honorius  IV.  of  the  SaveUi  family  (1285-1287),  the 
House  of  Aragon  maintained  itself  in  Sicily  in  spite  of  papal 
denunciation.  Under  Nicholas  IV.  (1288-1292),  Charles  II.  was 
crowned,  but  he  was  king  by  ceremony  alone.  In  1292,  the  fall 
of  Acre  brought  the  epoch  of  the  Crusades  to  a  close.  The 
death  of  Rudolf  of  Hapsburg  was  another  landmark.  From 
this  point  the  Popes  ceased  to  regard  themselves  definitely  as 
the  leaders  of  Christian  chivalry  against  the  heathen  world ; 
from  this  point  also  the  struggle  between  the  keys  and  the  Im- 
perium  becomes  submerged  in  the  under-current  of  rising  forces 
which  was  sweeping  on  towards  the  evolution  of  the  new  world. 
The  danger  to  the  Papacy  was  the  same  as  that  which  threatens 
an  individual  who  pins  his  faith  to  the  temporary  and  inessential 
expression  of  his  ideal.  The  Popes  had  for  so  long  been  satisfied 
and  absorbed  in  their  two  great  mediaeval  enterprises  that  they 
had  forgotten  to  read  the  signs  of  the  times.  Europe  was  making 
new  wine,  and  the  Papacy  had  nothing  but  old  bottles  to  receive 
it. 

It  was  possibly  some  unconscious  apprehension  of  this  which 
led  to  the  strange  and  inexplicable  events  of  the  year  1294.  Two 
years  had  passed  since  the  death  of  Nicholas  IV.  and  the  Cardi- 
nals assembled  at  Perugia  in  July  were  unable  to  come  to  any 
decision  as  to  his  successor.  Name  after  name  had  been 
suggested  and  thrown  out,  when,  more  it  seems  by  chance  than 
by  design,  someone  mentioned  Peter  Murrone,  the  hermit  of 
Sulmona.     The  result  was  the  election  to  the  distracted  Papacy 


192  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

of  a  simple  saint.  The  experiment  was  a  failure,  and  the  story 
of  "  San  Celestino  "  remains  as  a  monument  for  the  humiliation 
of  his  successors.  The  infinite  pathos  of  his  six  months'  pontifi- 
cate, the  confusion  which  his  simplicity  wrought  among  his 
friends  and  enemies  alike,  and  the  incongruity  of  his  spiritual 
graces  with  the  demands  of  the  Vatican  are  as  great  an  arraign- 
ment of  the  political  Papacy  as  the  vices  of  his  least  worthy 
successor.  From  a  political  point  of  view,  the  election  of  a  tired 
and  holy  old  man  at  such  a  crisis  was,  of  course,  an  absurdity. 
From  the  first  Celestine  V.  surrendered  to  the  domination  of  the 
master-mind  of  Cardinal  Gaetani.  From  the  little  cell  which  he 
built  himself  in  a  corner  of  the  Vatican  he  shed  all  the  graces 
of  his  holiness  on  the  unworthy  world  about  him — with  disas- 
trous results.  Offices  were  given  away  many  times  over  because 
the  Pope  could  not  deny  the  importunate.  Advantage  was  taken 
on  all  sides  of  his  humility,  his  gentleness,  and  his  utter  ignor- 
ance. He  was,  however,  capable  of  firmness  where  to  him  the 
way  seemed  clear.  In  his  resolute  self-deposition  he  withstood 
the  prayers  of  the  whole  curia  and  the  tears  of  Gaetani  himself. 
"  St.  Peter's  ship  is  wrecking,  with  me  at  its  helm,"  he  said,  and 
asking  pardon  of  the  princes  of  the  Church,  he  passed  out 
through  their  midst. 

Behind  the  sanctity  of  Celestine,  plots  and  intrigues  had 
screened  themselves  so  efl'ectually  that  it  is  impossible  to  dis- 
entangle the  events  which  actually  occurred  from  the  fictions 
which  subsequently  enfolded  them.  On  his  retirement,  the 
election  of  Gaetani  was  inevitable,  but  it  could  hardly  be  called 
popular.  He  was  accused  by  his  enemies  of  persuading  Celestine 
to  abdicate  by  unlawful  means.  It  remained  an  open  question 
whether  such  an  abdication  was  morally  valid  or  legally  possible. 
It  was  therefore  a  political  necessity  to  keep  Celestine  in  custody, 
and  his  sudden  death  in  the  Castle  of  Fumore  in  1296  gave  some 
colour  to  the  rumour  of  foul  play.  It  is  unlikely  that  Boniface 
VIII.  was  guilty  of  Celestine's  death.  Consummate  statesman 
as  he  was,  he  must  have  foreseen  the  inevitable  consequences  of 
such  a  crime,  and  the  opposition  of  the  Celestine  party  which 
dogged  him  throughout  his  pontificate  far  outweighed  any  pos- 
sible advantages  in  the  death  of  the  gentle  and  innocuous  saint. 

Benedict  Gaetani  was  seventy-six  years  old  when  he  became 
Pope  in  1295.  He  had  been  admirably  trained  as  a  lawyer  and 
a  legate  in  diplomatic  art.  He  had  a  magnificent  presence  and 
the  spirit  of  a  Caesar.  He  had  "played  much  at  the  game  of 
the  world,"  and  his  attitude  towards  it  was  contemptuous  and  in- 
tolerant.     His  coronation  festival  was  an  index  of  his  reign. 


THE  FALL  OF  THE  MEDIiEVAL  PAPACY      193 

Dressed  in  full  pontificals  he  rode  on  a  white  palfrey  through 
the  festive  streets,  while  two  kings,  Charles  of  Naples  and  Charles 
Martel  of  Hungary,  held  his  bridle.  The  Papacy  of  humility 
had  wrought  havoc  and  disaster  which  the  reign  of  magnificence 
tried  to  repair.  The  policy  which  he  pursued  in  Italy  was  far- 
sighted  and  vigorous.  Instead  of  curbing  the  democratic  growth 
of  the  rising  cities,  he  turned  it  to  his  own  account  by  securing 
the  magisterial  power  in  his  own  person.  City  after  city  elected 
him  as  Podesta,  and  even  Rome  itself  allowed  him  to  choose  its 
senators.  In  these  oflices  his  own  nephews  were  very  useful. 
The  Gaetani  were  a  comparatively  unknown  family  until 
Boniface  became  a  Cardinal,  but  in  his  orbit  his  nephews  rose 
to  undreamt-of  splendour.  One,  Francesco,  became  a  Cardinal ; 
another,  Peter,  Count  Palatine  and  Rector  of  Tuscany.  Peter'p 
sons.  Benedict  and  Lotfred,  added  still  further  dignities  to  the 
family  connection.  Their  rise  brought  them,  however,  first  into 
competition  and  afterwards  into  collision  with  the  older  and 
more  aristocratic  Colonna  family,  and  the  quarrels  which  followed 
led  directly  to  the  downfall  of  the  Pope. 

But  it  was  the  imperial,  rather  than  the  monarchical,  aspect 
of  his  office  which  principally  attracted  Boniface.  Since  the 
Interregnum  the  Holy  Roman  Empire  had  undoubtedly  been  a 
negligible  quantity,  and  Boniface  made  no  pretence  at  acknow- 
ledging it  except  when  occasionally  it  suited  his  diplomacy  to  do 
so.  "  I  am  Csesar :  I  am  Emperor,"  he  exclaimed  on  one  occa- 
sion when  the  ambassadors  of  the  de  facto  Emperor  Albert  came 
before  him.  The  Popes  had  long  since  discarded  the  theory  of 
the  twin  powers :  Boniface  left  no  place  in  his  scheme  for  any 
"  imperium  "  at  all,  other  than  his  own.  When,  however,  in  1303, 
the  Papacy  needed  an  ally  in  the  face  of  the  defiance  of  England 
and  France,  Boniface  pardoned  Albert,  "  the  one-eyed  sinner,"  and 
acknowledged  him  as  Emperor  on  conditions  of  slavish  obedience. 

Boniface  took  advantage  of  the  opening  of  the  new  century  to 
proclaim  his  ideal  in  the  famous  jubilee  of  1300.  Crowds  of 
pilgrims  from  the  ends  of  the  earth  thronged  the  streets  of  Rome 
and  fought  their  way  to  the  altar  of  St.  Peter  to  deposit  their 
gifts.  Streets  were  widened  and  bridges  thrown  out  to  accommo- 
date their  progress.  The  pilgrims  were  almost  entirely  humble 
people,  and  very  few  nobles  and  only  one  king  swelled  their 
ranks.  The  piety  and  self-sacrifice  which  they  showed  was  a 
touching  and  impressive  tribute  to  the  greatness  of  the  mediaeval 
Papacy.  In  this  last  pageant  of  her  golden  age,  the  Roman 
Church  reached  the  climax  of  her  outward  splendour.  Among 
the  crowds  who  thronged  the  streets  were  many  who  drew  from 

13 


194  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

the  great  festival  the  inspiration  of  a  masterpiece.  Dante  began 
his  poem  as  from  Easter  in  the  same  year.  The  young  Giotto, 
at  work  in  Rome  for  the  Pope's  nephew,  paused  to  paint  the 
opening  of  the  festival  on  the  walls  of  the  Lateran.  Giovanni 
Villani,  the  Florentine  historian,  "  also  found  himself  in  that 
blessed  pilgrimage  to  the  holy  city  of  Rome,"  and  returned  to  his 
native  town  inspired  by  the  spell  of  antiquity  to  enrich  posterity 
with  his  attractive  chronicle.  The  triumph,  which  seemed  so 
complete,  had  in  it  an  element  of  tragedy  in  the  face  of  what 
followed.  The  fall  of  Boniface  was  already  signalled  by  the 
opening  of  his  quarrel  with  the  King  of  France,  and  his  humilia- 
tion was  only  a  prelude  to  the  degradation  of  the  Papacy.  Only 
five  years  separate  the  glorious  jubilee  from  the  "  Babylonish 
captivity  ". 

No  abler  statesman  than  Boniface  ever  wore  the  papal  tiara, 
but  he  had  the  misfortune  to  live  in  an  age  of  great  men.  Hilde- 
brand  had  gained  his  victory  over  the  profligate  Henry  IV. ; 
Innocent  III.  had  no  more  formidable  antagonist  than  the  con- 
temptible King  John  ;  Gregory  IX.  and  Innocent  IV.  each  fought 
their  round  with  Frederick  II.,  the  misunderstood  anachronism. 
Boniface  was  probably  the  intellectual  equal  of  these  his  ablest 
predecessors,  but  none  of  these  had  been  faced  at  one  moment 
by  two  such  foes  as  Philip  le  Bel  of  France  and  Edward  I.  of 
England. 

Hostilities  with  England  of  a  passive  kind  had  begun  at  the 
opening  of  Boniface's  reign.  He  had  sent  two  legates  to  England 
to  demand  that  the  war  between  England  and  France  should 
cease.  Edward  turned  a  deaf  ear  to  the  Pope's  requirements  and 
continued  to  tax  the  clergy  to  pay  his  military  expenses.  Boni- 
face was  actuated  by  two  motives :  he  wanted  to  establish  the 
peace  of  Europe,  and  he  disliked  the  drain  on  ecclesiastical 
resources  which  royal  taxation  created.  Edward's  obduracy  led 
to  the  thunderbolt  of  "  Clericis  laicos  ".  The  Bull  asserted  the 
complete  immunity  of  clerical  bodies  from  every  kind  of  lay  taxa- 
tion ;  the  laity  were  forbidden  to  receive  and  the  clergy  to  pay 
on  penalty  of  excommunication.  It  was  an  epitome  of  papal 
pretension — the  translation  of  high  papal  theory  into  terms  of 
finance.  The  clergy  were  ready  enough  at  first  to  follow  the  lead 
of  Boniface.  They  were  tired  of  paying  for  wars  in  which  they 
were  little  concerned,  and  Edward's  demands  had  certainly  been 
exacting.  The  Dean  of  St.  Paul's  had  fallen  dead  of  fright  at 
Edward's  feet  in  the  middle  of  an  expostulation  in  1294.  His 
place  as  the  champion  of  resistance  was  taken  by  the  dauntless 
Archbishop  Winchelsea,  who  refused  the  subsidy  in  the  name  of 


THE  FALL  OF  THE  MEDIAEVAL  PAPACY      195 

the  clergy  at  the  Parliament  of  Bury  in  1295.  Edward  in  retalia- 
tion locked  the  ecclesiastical  barns  with  the  royal  seal.  Win- 
chelsea  then  ordered  the  papal  Bull  to  be  read  in  all  the 
cathedrals,  and  urged  the  clergy  to  stand  by  their  holy  father  in 
his  defence  of  their  liberties.  Edward  hurled  back  their  defiance 
with  an  edict  of  outlawry,  which  effectually  broke  the  back  of 
their  resistance.  Denied  the  King's  justice  and  bereft  of  the 
King's  protection,  desperation  bred  disunion,  and  the  clerical 
party  split  into  two  camps.  The  Archbishop  of  York  submitted 
with  a  compromise,  and  the  friars  at  his  back  preached  com- 
pliance. Winchelsea  stood  out  to  the  last,  and  with  him  the 
holy  Bishop  of  Grosteste.  Their  lands  were  seized  and  they  were 
driven  out  of  the  kingdom.  Edward,  however,  in  one  of  his 
impetuous  moments  of  half-sincere  and  half-dramatic  reaction 
pardoned  the  Archbishop  and  restored  him  with  every  demonstra- 
tion of  affection.  Winchelsea  used  the  moment  to  wring  from 
the  King  a  Confirmation  of  the  Charters,  thus  turning  an 
ecclesiastical  crisis  into  a  constitutional  landmark. 

The  quarrel  with  England  was  merely  the  prelude  to  the 
more  serious  contest  in  France.  It  had  its  origin  in  the  same 
cause — the  exactions  of  the  Crown  and  the  jealousy  of  the  papal 
treasury.  While  Edward  had  been  severe,  Philip  was  extor- 
tionate :  Edward  wanted  money  to  pay  his  way  ;  Philip  demanded 
it  to  gratify  a  lust.  ^Moreover,  Philip's  tone  towards  Boniface  was 
arrogant  and  offensive  from  the  beginning.  The  Pope's  attempt 
to  arbitrate  in  Philip's  quarrel  with  the  Count  of  Flanders  was 
met  by  a  lofty  rebuke  for  interference.  "  Clericis  laicos  "  was 
answered  by  an  Ordinance  forbidding  the  export  of  goods  of 
value  without  the  permission  of  the  King — a  clever  device  to 
provide  against  the  outflow  of  wealth  from  France  to  Rome. 
Boniface,  however,  waived  the  point  with  unwonted  leniency. 
He  issued  a  Bull  exempting  France  from  the  unpopular  measure, 
as  an  appendix  to  the  greater  national  compliment  of  the 
canonisation  of  St.  Louis.  The  mildness  of  the  Pope  was  due  to 
the  pressure  of  the  Colonnas  upon  his  political  position  :  the 
great  jubilee  restored  his  normal  temper. 

The  last  pilgrims  had  not  left  the  streets  of  Rome  before  the 
forces  began  to  gather  against  Boniface.  The  Fraticelli,  the 
fanatical  left  wing  of  the  Franciscans,  and  the  remnant  of  the 
Celestinian  party  made  common  cause  against  him,  and  their 
mouthpiece,  Jacopone,  wrote  telling  satires  at  his  expense.  One 
greater  than  Jacopone  was  alienated  from  the  papal  cause  by 
the  old  and  ineffectual  expedient  of  employing  a  foreign  cham- 
pion  to   oppose  an  indigenous  movement.     Awakened  by  the 


196  A  SHOET  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

noise  of  the  Colonna  scandals  to  the  weakness  of  his  position, 
Boniface  summoned  Charles  of  Valois,  the  French  King's  brother, 
to  crush  the  Ghibellines  of  Tuscany.  The  Pope's  "treachery" 
cost  him  the  esteem  of  Dante,  who  went  over  to  the  cause  of  the 
oppressed,  and  gave  to  the  "  Divina  Commedia  "  the  character 
of  a  Ghibelline  apologetic.  A  further  cause  of  the  weakness  of 
Boniface  was  a  political  blunder  into  which  his  obstinate  high- 
handedness had  led  him.  In  the  course  of  1297,  he  was  called 
in  to  arbitrate  in  his  private  capacity,  i.e.  as  Benedict  Gaetani, 
between  England  and  France.  It  was  expressly  understood  that 
the  papal  office  was  in  no  way  to  obtrude  itself  in  the  proceed- 
ings. Boniface  was,  however,  foolish  enough  to  spoil  a  great 
opportunity  by  a  display  of  official  vanity.  He  published  the 
arbitration  terms  in  the  form  of  a  papal  Bull,  and  thus  drew 
down  on  himself  the  fury  of  the  two  kings  whose  confidence  he 
had  violated.  A  subsequent  attempt  to  mediate  between  Eng- 
land and  Scotland  was  consequently  rejected  with  a  curt  petition 
to  the  Pope  to  confine  himself  to  his  own  concerns. 

There  was  no  longer  any  restraining  force  to  hold  Boniface 
and  Philip  back  from  the  contest  which  every  one  must  have 
known  to  be  inevitable.  The  French  clergy  were  already  pour- 
ing their  grievances  against  the  King  into  the  sympathetic  ear 
of  the  Pope.  The  exiled  Colonnas  were  fanning  the  flame  in 
exactly  the  same  way  at  the  French  court.  Boniface  exhorted 
Philip  to  repair  the  evil  he  had  wrought.  Philip's  only  reply 
was  to  enter  into  an  open  alliance  with  Albert  of  Austria, 
their  bond  of  union  being  their  mutual  antagonism  to  Boniface. 
It  is  not  necessary  to  look  further  for  the  causes  of  quarrel 
between  two  inflexible  characters,  who  happen  to  be  also  the 
exponents  of  utterly  incompatible  principles.  The  mission  of 
Bernard  Saisset,  Bishop  of  Pamiers,  the  object  of  which  is  un- 
known, brought  the  tension  to  breaking-point.  The  papal  envoy 
was  a  tactless  and  turbulent  person,  who  had  already  made  him- 
self unpopular  at  the  French  court,  and  the  Pope's  choice  of  a 
representative  seems  too  deplorable  to  be  entirely  accidental. 
Animosity  broke  out  in  a  warfare  of  phrases,  hurled  at  each 
other  by  the  Pope's  envoy  and  the  King's  lawyer,  which  ended 
in  the  arraignment  of  Saisset  for  treason.  He  was  accused  of 
using  contemptuous  language  about  Philip ;  he  had  called  him 
a  bastard,  a  handsome  image,  and  an  issuer  of  bad  money. 
Philip  sent  Peter  Flotte  to  report  his  ill-doings  to  his  master, 
who  heard  of  them  with  equanimity.  Peter  drove  the  lesson 
home  with  characteristic  audacity.  Confronted  by  the  Pope's 
assertions  of  the  supremacy  of  the  spiritual  over  the  secular 


THE  FALL  OF  THE  MEDIAEVAL  PAPACY      197 

power,  he  boldly  defined  the  situation  in  the  reply,  "  Your 
power  in  temporal  things  is  a  power  in  word,  that  of  the  King 
my  master  in  deed  ".  Boniface  ordered  Saisset  to  be  released 
and  sent  to  Rome ;  he  annulled  the  special  privileges  which 
Philip  had  secured  in  regard  to  Clericis  Laicos,  and  he  sum- 
moned the  clergy  of  France  to  appear  in  Rome  to  accuse  the 
King. 

A  crude  and  oflfensive  Bull  was  circulated  widely  in  France  to 
excite  indignation,  but  the  complaint  of  Boniface  that  fictitious 
documents  were  spread  about  in  his  name  seems  to  have  been 
well-founded.  At  anyrate  it  gave  Philip  an  opportunity  to  write 
an  answer,  in  which  he  could  let  himself  go  in  an  orgy  of  abuse 
and  discourtesy.  "  Philip  by  the  grace  of  God  King  of  France, 
to  Boniface,  who  assumes  to  be  Chief  Pontiff,  little  or  no  greeting. 
Let  your  fatuity  know  that  in  temporals  we  are  subordinate  to 
none.  The  collation  to  vacant  benefices  and  prebends  belongs 
to  us  by  royal  right ;  the  fruits  are  ours.  We  will  maintain  all 
collations  made  and  to  be  made  by  us,  and  their  possessors.  All 
who  believe  otherwise  we  hold  to  be  fools  or  madmen."  The 
undisputed  Greater  Bull,  known  as  AuBCulta  Fill,  contains  the 
formal  indictment  of  Philip's  offences  under  all  their  different 
heads.  It  was  expressed  in  the  old  courteous,  elusive  language 
which  had  for  generations  stung  emperors  and  kings  to  fury. 
The  ambiguous  thunder  of  the  Old  Testament  phrases  blended 
with  the  legal  innovations  upon  which  the  power  of  the  political 
Papacy  rested.  The  tradition  that  Philip  burned  the  Bull  is 
probably  an  over-statement.  He  did,  however,  publish  a  bogus 
version  of  it,  which  largely  accounted  for  the  national  sympathy 
with  Philip's  attitude.  Public  opinion  is  most  clearly  shown  in 
the  addresses  to  the  Pope  which  the  Estates-General  drew  up 
early  in  1302.  The  first  address,  from  the  nobles  to  the  Car- 
dinals, asserts  the  independence  of  France,  and  defends  the 
conduct  of  Philip  in  upholding  it.  The  Cardinals  replied  to  it 
with  moderation  and  dignity,  and  by  inference  made  Peter  Flotte 
responsible  for  the  whole  crisis.  The  second  address,  from  the 
clergy  to  the  Pope,  was  more  respectful  but  equally  emphatic. 
The  Pope's  answer  is  a  strong  testimony  to  his  polemical  skill. 
He  indignantly  accuses  the  clergy  of  apostacy,  because  they  had 
timorously  disobeyed  the  summons  to  Rome.  "That  son  of 
Belial,  Peter  Flotte,"  was  again  made  the  scapegoat  of  Philip's 
misdoings.  Finally,  by  a  clever  device,  the  supporters  of  tem- 
poral independence  are  accused  of  the  dreaded  heresy  of  Man- 
icheism — a  form  of  abuse  all  the  more  telling  because  it  was 
equally  effective  whether  it  was  understood  or  not  by  those 


198    A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

against  whom  it  was  directed.  The  Bull,  Unam  Sanctam,  of 
doubtful  authenticity,  was  issued  by  the  same  Consistory,  and 
embodied  the  same  principles  in  more  formal  language.  In  all 
the  papal  documents  the  point  on  which  insistence  is  chiefly 
laid  is  the  argument  which  Innocent  III,  so  frequently  used  :  the 
spiritual  prerogative  in  no  way  entrenches  on  the  temporal ;  the 
two  swords  do  not  necessarily  clash ;  both  are  to  be  used  in  the 
service  of  Christ  and  His  Vicar,  and  the  royal  rights  of  kings  are 
not  endangered,  though  their  sins  are  of  course  to  be  punished. 

Throughout  the  quarrel,  Boniface  persistently  translates  the 
political  hostility  of  Philip  'into  the  spiritual  rebellion  of  a 
sinner.  Philip's  personal  character  laid  him  open  to  this  kind 
of  attack,  and  made  it  all  the  harder  for  him  to  parry  it.  His 
defeat  at  Courtrai  and  the  death  of  Peter  Flotte  left  him  still 
further  exposed.  Boniface  therefore  lost  no  more  time  in  ad- 
monition and  rebuke.  By  a  sudden  reversal  of  his  policy,  he 
took  Albert  of  Austria,  now  abject  and  servile,  into  his  favour, 
and  sent  an  ultimatum  to  Paris  in  the  form  of  Twelve  Articles 
for  the  King's  signature.  The  legate,  however,  miscalculated 
the  weakness  of  Philip's  position.  France  still  remained  on  his 
side,  and  the  able  and  unscrupulous  Nogaret  had  taken  the 
place  of  Peter  Flotte  in  the  King's  confidence.  Philip  failed  to 
clear  himself  of  the-  charges  to  the  Pope's  satisfaction,  and  drew 
down  on  himself  a  Brief  of  Excommunication  (April,  1303). 

Philip's  anger  broke  forth  in  gusts  of  ineffective  abuse.  Two 
Parlements  at  the  Louvre,  in  which  Nogaret  took  the  lead,  drew 
up  an  indictment  of  Boniface  which  is  too  blustering  for  serious 
analysis.  Nogaret  charged  him  with  being  a  heretic,  a  simoniac, 
and  a  criminal,  and  appealed  against  him  to  a  General  Council. 
The  Ordinance  of  Reformation  was  passed  at  the  same  time,  the 
real  object  of  which  was  to  cover  a  further  extension  of  royal 
jurisdiction  with  a  semblance  of  religious  reform.  At  the  second 
Parlement,  a  further  condemnation  of  the  Pope  was  carried  out, 
with  an  absurd  combination  of  ridiculous  personal  charges  with 
serious  political  grievances.  The  animosity  itself  was  genuine 
and  justifiable  enough,  but  the  expression  of  it  merely  proves  the 
childish  impotence  to  which  Philip  and  his  party  were  reduced. 
Boniface  "  had  publicly  declared  that  he  would  rather  be  a 
dog,  or  an  ass,  or  any  brute  beast  rather  than  a  Frenchman ; 
that  no  Frenchman  had  a  soul  which  could  deserve  everlasting 
happiness ".  A  long  indictment  of  his  private  life,  his 
sorcery,  wizardry,  and  incredible  vices  aided  the  charges. 
Philip  took  them  all  seriously,  and  Boniface  found  it  necessary 
to  clear  himself  by  oath  at  Anagni,  pointing  at  the  same  time 


THE  FALL  OF  THE  MEDIAEVAL  PAPACY      199 

to  Philip's  reception  of  the  Colonnas  as  the  undoubted  origin  of 
the  attack. 

But  the  fury  of  Philip  once  aroused  could  not  be  easily 
allayed,  and  behind  the  verbose  attack  of  the  Parlement,  a  plot 
of  consummate  audacity  was  being  formed.  Philip  had  through- 
out the  quarrel  made  a  point  of  collecting  in  his  camp  every  one 
who  had  a  grievance  against  the  Pope.  Bribes  were  scattered, 
among  the  Italian  landlords  who  had  been  ousted  by  the  re- 
lations of  Boniface.  Nearly  all  the  lesser  barons  revolted 
against  their  new  overlords,  and  the  Gaetani  power  spread  all 
across  Southern  Italy.  Even  in  the  college  itself,  Philip  was 
able  to  find  adherents.  In  September,  1303,  William  of  Nogaret 
and  Sciarra  Colonna  entered  Anagni,  where  the  old  Pope  was 
residing,  with  cries  of  "  Death  to  Pope  Boniface  !  Long  live  King 
Philip  !  "  The  town  made  no  resistance,  but  the  Pope's  nephews 
boldly  defended  his  palace.  The  successful  conspirators  gave 
the  Pope  nine  hours  in  which  to  submit,  but  all  the  fighting 
spirit  of  an  old  warrior  came  to  Boniface  in  his  hour  of  need. 
At  the  end  of  the  appointed  time,  his  defenders  capitulated, 
and  his  servants  forsook  him.  The  two  conspirators,  pursu- 
ing their  way  through  the  deserted  palace,  found  a  calm  and 
dignified  figure  seated  on  the  papal  throne  in  full  pontifical 
vestments,  his  head  bowed  over  a  golden  cross,  and  in  his 
hands  the  dreaded  keys.  The  rebel  Cardinal  sprang  forward 
to  murder  him,  but  the  more  cautious  lawyer  held  him  back. 
With  deliberate  heroism,  Boniface  maintained  his  dignity,  an- 
swering their  insults  with  his  "  majestic  silence,"  and  their 
menaces  with  his  contempt  of  death.  He  was  confined  in  his 
palace,  while  Philip's  mercenaries  sacked  his  treasures  ;  but  his 
dramatic  stand  had  done  its  work.  The  French  coups  d'etat 
had  stunned,  but  not  paralysed,  the  papal  party.  News  of  the 
Pope's  desperate  situation  was  carried  to  Rome  with  the  inspir- 
ing story  of  his  courage.  Those  who  had  been  impervious  to 
French  influence,  whose  interests  were  bound  up  with  the  Gae- 
tani fortunes,  joined  with  Cardinal  Fieschi  in  an  expedition  to 
the  Pope's  rescue.  The  brutality  of  Nogaret  and  Sciarra  and  the 
heroism  of  Boniface  produced  a  reaction.  The  French  conspir- 
ators contrived  to  escape  before  the  relieving  force  had  made  its 
way  into  the  palace.  Boniface  was  conducted  to  Rome  in 
triumph,  after  forgiving  aU  his  enemies  with  a  mildness  born  of 
misfortune.  But  he  was  never  more  a  prisoner  than  in  the  hour 
of  his  deliverance.  Those  who  had  been  his  rescuers  now  made 
themselves  his  master.  The  Orsini  dictated  his  policy,  and  the 
Colonna  menaced  him  in  the  distance. 


200  A  SHOET  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

He  died  in  October,  1303,  at  the  age  of  86,  heart-broken  by 
compulsory  submission  to  a  domination  which  all  his  life  he 
was  accustomed  to  exercise  over  others.  With  him  fell  the 
great  mediaeval  Papacy.  He  had  tried  to  carry  its  pretensions 
too  high  when  already  they  had  reached  a  dangerous  eminence. 
He  consistently  pressed  a  theory,  which  no  longer  covered  the 
facts,  to  its  logical  conclusion  and  beyond  it.  "  He  had  striven 
for  a  goal  which  had  already  become  fantastic." 


4 


CHAPTER   XIX 

THE    BABYLONISH   CAPTIVITY   AND   THE   BEGINNINGS   OF 
THE   INTELLECTUAL  REVIVAL,  a.u.   1303-1334 

THE  disaster  of  Anagni,  like  every  other  historical  mile- 
stone, indicates  two  directions,  the  past  and  the  future. 
For  the  past,  it  was  retributive.  As  the  victory  of 
Canossa  had  expressed  the  supreme  moment  of  the  mediaeval 
Papacy,  so  the  defeat  of  Anagni  announced  to  the  world  its 
failure.  But  the  triumph  of  Philip  over  Boniface  does  not 
merely  suggest  a  retrospect.  It  is  equally  eloquent  of  the  way 
which  was  still  untrodden.  We  no  longer  think  of  the  Reforma- 
tion as  a  sudden  cataclysm  which  overthrew  the  power  of  the 
Popes  in  the  sixteenth  century  and  hurled  half  of  Europe  into 
the  vortex  of  Protestantism.  Nor  do  we  regard  it  as  a  capricious 
act  of  divine  deliverance  which  saved  the  age  of  Luther  from 
spiritual  bondage.  It  is  possible  to  trace,  in  the  circumstances 
which  group  themselves  round  the  Anagni  ti'agedy,  all  the 
forces  already  at  work  which  hereafter  came  together  in  the 
Reformation  movement.  It  is  true  that  these  circumstances 
were  for  the  most  part  independent  of  one  another,  and  it  does 
not  seem  to  have  often  occurred  to  their  representatives  to  make 
common  cause  against  a  common  foe.  But  isolated  acts  of 
defiance  had  already  come  from  most  of  the  quarters  in  which 
the  storm  finally  broke.  The  investiture  wars  had  dealt  blows 
at  the  moral  prestige  of  individual  Popes  from  which  the  Papacy 
could  never  recover.  The  forces  of  nationality  had  asserted 
themselves  successfully  in  more  than  one  rebellion  against  the 
papal  theory  of  Christian  unity.  Theorists  of  all  kinds — 
schoolmen,  philosophers,  and  poets — were  already  at  work 
exposing  the  supreme  unreason  which  underlay  the  papal  view 
of  the  world.  Lastly,  it  was  the  bitterness  of  the  new  Pope, 
Benedict  XL,  to  realise  that  the  weapons  of  the  spiritual 
prerogative  had  lost  their  power  by  too  frequent  and  inappro- 
priate use. 

In  the  last  personal  duel  between  a  great  Pope  and  a  great 
temporal  Prince,  the  King  of  France  had  won  his  victory  in 

201 


202  A  SHOET  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

spite  of  anathema,  excommunication,  and  the  direst  papal 
thunder.  What  was  worse — his  subjects  had  supported  him  and 
associated  themselves  with  him  in  sacrilege.  Worst  of  all,  the 
outrage  of  Anagni  had  failed  to  shock  the  world  or  to  create  the 
reaction  which  Churchmen  had  anticipated  in  the  mind  of 
Christendom  at  large,  Benedict  found  it  impossible  even  to 
carry  into  effect  his  condemnation  of  the  rebels.  He  was  obliged 
to  release  the  Colonna  from  the  ban,  and  to  restore  the  lands  of 
all  except  the  arch-traitor  Sciarra.  Philip  le  Bel  made  a  formal 
declaration  of  innocence  in  regard  to  the  plot,  which  nobody 
believed,  but  which  the  Pope  himself  felt  it  expedient  not  to 
dispute.  In  1304,  Benedict  was  compelled  to  revoke  the  decrees 
against  the  King  which  his  predecessor  had  passed,  and  to 
associate  himself  with  Philip  in  condemning  the  acts  of  Boniface 
which  had  led  to  the  quarrel.  In  May  the  same  year,  Benedict 
promulgated  the  decrees  of  absolution  together  with  a  modi- 
fication of  Clericis  Laicos.  A  poor  shadow  of  a  Pope,  gentle 
and  yielding  in  disposition,  he  remained  in  Rome  to  rule  with 
what  authority  he  could,  under  the  dictation  of  the  Orsini, 
while  he  was  harassed  on  the  one  hand  by  the  Colonna  and  on 
the  other  by  the  Gaetani.  Finally  his  position  became  intolerable. 
In  July  he  fled  to  Perugia,  and  with  a  burst  of  daring  as 
ineffective  as  his  earlier  complacence,  he  issued  fierce  Bulls  of 
condemnation  against  Philip  and  the  leading  conspirators.  He 
was  rewarded  with  instant  death,  whether  from  poison  or  from 
overstrung  nerves  history  gives  no  certain  verdict.  His  ponti- 
ficate had  merely  served  to  prove  the  extent  of  the  papal  defeat. 

The  long  vacancy  which  followed  was  due  to  strife  between 
the  French  and  Italian  parties  in  the  College.  The  truce  which 
was  arranged  after  eleven  months  adopted  a  complicated 
principle  which  promised  to  satisfy  both  parties.  The  Italian 
party  were  allowed  to  make  the  nomination  provided  that  the 
candidate  should  be  a  Frenchman.  Three  French  Bishops  were 
accordingly  found,  all  of  whom,  in  spite  of  their  nationality, 
were  partisans  of  Boniface  VIII.  against  Philip.  The  French 
party  made  the  best  of  it,  and  left  Philip  to  come  to  an  under- 
standing with  the  least  objectionable  of  the  three  nominees. 
This  was  Bertrand  de  Got,  Archbishop  of  Bordeaux,  who  became 
Pope  as  Clement  V.  (1305-1313). 

During  the  coronation  of  Clement  at  Lyons,  a  wall  fell  and 
knocked  off  his  crown^  from  which  the  papal  carbuncle  was 
lost.  His  ill-fated  pontificate  thus  opened  under  an  evil  omen. 
Under  Clement  the  political  calamity  befell  the  Papacy  to  which 
Petrarch   gave   the   name  of   the   Babylonish   captivity.      His 


THE  BABYLONISH  CAPTIVITY  203 

predecessor  had  found  it  impossible  to  remain  at  Rome  under 
present  conditions.  Heavy  as  were  the  disadvantages  of  de- 
pendence on  the  King  of  France — a  dependence  which  seemed 
to  be  inevitable — Clement  thought  that  he  might  just  as  well 
avail  himself  of  its  possible  advantages.  After  some  aimless 
wandering  in  the  south  of  France,  he  fixed  his  headquarters  at 
Avignon — not  strictly  a  French  town,  belonging  as  it  did  to 
Charles  II.  of  Naples  as  Count  of  Provence,  and  yet  within  the 
radius  of  French  protection.  The  dissociation  of  the  Papacy 
from  the  Eternal  City  might  have  been  expected  to  produce 
a  gi'eater  immediate  catastrophe  than  it  actually  did.  At  first, 
however,  it  made  comparatively  little  difference  to  the  political 
position  of  the  Papacy.  Weak  as  the  Pope  was  in  Avignon,  he 
could  not  have  been  stronger  in  Rome,  for  Rome  was  ablaze  with 
a  three-cornered  faction  fight,  and  Philip  had  every  inducement 
to  fan  the  flame  in  order  to  perpetuate  the  humiliation  of  the 
Papacy. 

Once  more  the  Pope  had  fallen  into  the  disastrous  posi- 
tion of  a  prot^g^,  and  the  situation  was  the  more  humiliating 
since  his  protector  disdained  the  traditional  disguise  of  the 
armed  friend,  and  assumed  openly  the  demeanour  of  a  victorious 
foe.  Clement  would  much  rather  have  had  nothing  to  do  with 
Philip,  whose  snares  were  so  cunningly  laid  about  him.  This 
being  impossible,  he  encamped  under  his  shadow,  made  apparent 
surrender,  and  at  the  same  time  watched  for  an  opportunity  to 
extract  whatever  benefits  he  could  from  his  uncomfortable 
situation.  It  was  really  quite  a  good  choice — from  every  point 
of  view  except  that  of  the  idealist,  and  his  voice  could  be 
ignored,  for  as  yet  it  seldom  reached  the  Curia.  Avignon  was 
not  French,  and  yet  under  French  influence,  although  it  did  not 
at  present  belong  to  the  Papacy,  it  was  close  to  the  Venaissin 
which  had  been  owned  by  the  Popes  since  1228. 

The  one  subject  of  supreme  importance  to  Clement  V.,  and 
for  which  he  was  prepared  to  make  any  concession  was  the 
vindication  of  the  memory  of  Boniface  VIII.  The  theory  of 
spiritual  power  had  to  be  saved  at  whatever  cost  of  political 
sacrifice.  It  was  the  theory  itself  which  was  on  its  trial  in  the 
reign  of  Boniface — the  theory  pushed  to  unwise  conclusions  and 
unhappily  involved  in  political  and  personal  causes.  The 
problem  before  Clement  was  to  abandon  the  temporary  and 
inessential,  or  in  other  words,  the  political  quttrrel,  and  to  hold 
fast  to  the  vital  principle  which  Philip's  defiance  had  so  terribly 
imperilled.  Happily,  Philip  also  had  his  requirements,  and 
Clement  could  with  careful  management  set  up  a  diplomatic 


204  A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

barter.  Philip  wanted  the  Empire  for  his  brother  Charles,  and 
he  chose  to  imagine,  or  to  assume  that  Clement  could  bestow  it 
at  his  discretion.  Clement  found  it  convenient  to  let  him  think 
so,  but  at  the  same  time  he  had  no  intention  of  so  dangerously- 
adding  to  the  preponderance  of  France  in  Europe.  His 
manoeuvres  would  not  have  discredited  an  age  of  riper  diplomacy. 
He  contrived  to  allow  Philip  to  imagine  that  he  was  throwing  all 
his  influence  on  to  the  scale  in  favour  of  Charles's  candidature, 
while  at  the  same  time  he  was  encouraging  the  German  princes 
to  elect  in  a  manner  much  more  favourable  to  their  own 
interests.  The  election  of  Henry  VII.  as  King  of  the  Romans 
consequently  appeared  to  have  been  carried  through  in  spite  of 
the  Pope,  who  with  the  support  of  Philip  proceeded  to  lay  down 
extensive  conditions  as  a  preliminary  to  the  coronation. 

The  Emperor-elect  felt  that  double-dealing  was  in  the  air,  but 
he  was  not  shrewd  enough  to  detect  its  origin.  At  the  same 
time,  he  was  irritated  by  the  Pope's  demands,  and  in  particular 
by  the  oath  of  vassalage  which  Clement  insisted  upon  as  a 
symbol  of  Imperial  vassalage.  Henry  was  foolish  and  precipi- 
tate: he  hurried  into  Italy,  where  Robert  of  Naples  was  busy 
upholding  the  rights  of  the  Pope  against  his  Ghibelline  rebels. 
In  1312.  Henry  forced  the  Cardinals  to  crown  him  in  the  Lateran, 
while  Robert  .held  St.  Peter's  against  him  in  the  name  of  the 
Pope.  But  he  was  not  strong  enough  to  carry  through  a  coup 
d'Uat,  and  after  a  few  flashes  of  success  he  withdrew  from  Italy, 
leaving  disappointment  and  democratic  revolution  in  his  train. 
Henry  VII.  appears  in  the  "Paradiso"  as  the  hope  of  the 
Ghibellines  to  whom  Dante  had  looked  in  1300  as  a  destined 
deliverer  of  Italy :  it  is  not  the  portrait  as  known  to  history  of 
the  ineffective  leader  who  returned  after  a  fruitless  expedition  to 
die  in  his  own  country  in  1313. 

Clement  had  managed  to  deny  the  Empire  to  France  without 
quarrelling  with  Philip,  and  now  a  more  urgent  project  called  for 
new  concessions  from  the  Pope  for  the  gratification  of  the  King. 
Philip  owed  enormous  sums  of  money  to  the  aristocratic  Order 
of  the  Knights  Templar.  It  is  probable  that  their  general,  Du 
Molay,  had  been  impolitic  in  pressing  for  repayment.  This  in 
itself  was  enough  to  cause  their  ruin,  for  Philip  was  not  a 
merciful  debtor.  But  the  cataract  of  charges  which  fell  on  their 
heads  cannot  have  had  a  purely  fictitious  source.  The  Order 
was  a  survival  from  an  age  when  chivalry  was  more  pure  and 
ideals  were  more  ingenuous.  It  had  outlived  its  usefulness,  and 
allowing  for  the  animosity  of  PhiHp,  the  trial  and  condemna- 
tion of  the  knights  was  probably  an  instance  of  a  necessary 


THE  BABYLONISH  CAPTIVITY  205 

reform  barbarously  carried  out.  It  was  also  the  price  paid  by 
Clement  for  the  vindication  of  the  memory  of  Boniface.  Con- 
demned by  the  King  in  1307,  and  by  General  Council  in  1311,  the 
Order  was  finally  abohshed  by  the  Pope  in  the  Council  of  Vienna 
in  April,  1312. 

The  Council  of  Vienna  had  thi-ee  big  subjects  to  deal  with, 
and  Clement  showed  his  astuteness  in  his  manipulation  of  the 
interplay  between  them.  He  suspended  his  verdict  on  the 
Templars  while  he  wearied  Philip  by  the  long-winded  negotia- 
tions connected  with  the  trial  of  Boniface.  The  third  subject, 
that  of  ecclesiastical  reform,  Clement  attacked  with  a  surprising 
amount  of  enthusiasm,  stimulated  by  a  sound  political  instinct 
for  moral  decency.  The  scandals  of  the  Curia  were  more  con- 
spicuous at  Avignon  than  in  Rome,  and  the  eyes  of  Europe  were 
focussed  on  the  little  town  with  more  than  casual  interest. 
Accordingly,  the  last  energies  of  Clement  were  spent  in  rigorously 
checking  ecclesiastical  abuses,  the  oppression  of  monks  by 
Bishops,  the  immoral  lives  of  priests,  and  their  worldly  habits, 
to  which  contemporary  literature  bears  abundant  testimony. 

Clement  died  in  April,  1314;  his  memory  was  loathed  by 
his  political  opponents  as  that  of  "an  astute  and  dishonest 
politician,"  but  it  was  reserved  for  later  generations  to  execrate 
him  as  the  author  of  the  Babylonish  captivity. 

The  Conclave  which  met  at  Carpentras  to  elect  Clement's 
successor  had  more  than  the  ordinary  difficulties  to  cope  with. 
Everybody  knew  that  the  problem  was  momentous.  The  ItaHan 
Cardinals  clamoured  loudly  for  an  Italian  Pope  and  the  restora- 
tion of  the  Papacy  to  Rome.  The  French  Cardinals,  who  were 
in  the  majority,  were  equally  determined  to  keep  the  Papacy  in 
France,  and  among  them  the  Gascon  element  prevailed.  Mean- 
while pillage  and  violence  made  the  proceedings  impossible. 
The  Gascons  showed  by  their  behaviour  on  this  occasion  that 
they  knew  what  was  expected  of  the  public  when  an  election 
was  held  in  their  midst,  and  the  forcible  detention  of  the 
Cardinals  at  Lyons  by  the  French  King  was  necessary  to  induce 
them  to  conclude  their  business.  Their  choice  fell,  in  August, 
1316,  on  the  old  Cardinal  of  Portus,  a  middle-class  Gascon  who 
had  risen  by  the  favour  of  Robert  of  Naples  and  by  a  certain 
kind  of  useful  ability  which  had  brought  him  into  prominence 
at  the  Council  of  Vienna. 

The  pontificate  of  John  XXII.  seems  to  have  won  a  greater 
notoriety  than  its  events  can  easily  account  for.  He  has  been 
made  the  scapegoat  for  the  ofi'ences  with  which  posterity  loaded 
the  Avignon  Popes,  and  he  was  unfortunate  enough  to  be  a 


206  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

conspicuous  target  in  an  epoch  of  literary  redundance.  For  he 
opened  the  last  and  least  worthy  phase  of  the  old  Imperial 
contest.  The  struggle  for  the  Empire  ended  in  the  decisive 
victory  of  Lewis  of  Bavaria  at  Miihldorf  in  1322.  This  provoked 
the  animosity  of  the  Pope,  who  had  meant  to  control  the  events 
by  arbitration.  John  summoned  Lewis  to  appear  before  the 
Curia,  claiming  the  antiquated  right  of  decision  in  cases  of 
dispute.  Lewis  felt  strong  enough  to  refuse,  and  he  was  con- 
sequently excommunicated.  The  struggle  which  these  pro- 
ceedings opened  lasted  until  the  death  of  Lewis  in  1347.  It 
was  not  worthy  of  the  traditions  which  earlier  contests  had 
bequeathed.  There  is  none  of  the  old  splendour  of  the  Hohen- 
staufen  feud,  although  the  world  at  large  was  much  more 
interested  in  it,  and  the  events  were  watched  and  reported  with 
far  more  contemporary  excitement.  In  the  small  and  complex 
motives  of  John  XXII.  we  miss  the  extravagant  magnificence  of 
Hildebrand,  and  the  vindictive  parries  of  Lewis  bear  no  compari- 
son with  the  splendid  defiance  of  earlier  Emperors.  And  yet, 
Lewis  set  out  with  advantages  which  his  predecessors  had  lacked. 
The  Avignon  Papacy,  if  not  altogether  discredited,  was  un- 
doubtedly in  disrepute.  Abuses  which  had  passed  unnoticed  in 
Rome  were  notorious  scandals  in  the  Venaissin,  and  Christendom 
did  not  hide  its  outraged  feelings.  The  critical  and  defensive 
spirit  showed  itself  in  England,  in  the  Statutes  of  Provisors  and 
Praemunire,  and  in  Germany  by  the  passing  of  the  decrees  of 
1338,  which  laid  down  the  doctrine  that  a  legally  chosen 
Emperor  needs  no  further  confirmation,  holding  his  powers  from 
God  alone. 

Another  difi'erence  between  the  present  contest  and  the 
earlier  ones  lay  in  the  fact  that  doctrinal  differences  were  in- 
volved in  it.  It  is  this  which  gives  it  so  much  of  the  character 
of  the  Reformation  itself.  It  also  accounts  to  a  great  extent  for 
its  extraordinary  importance  in  literature.  A  schism  among  the 
Franciscans  had  arisen  on  the  subject  of  apostolic  poverty. 
John  XXII.,  at  the  expense  of  his  reputation,  opposed  the 
Fraticelli  or  Spiritual  Franciscans,  and  held  to  a  more  modified 
view  of  the  apostolic  injunction,  which  was  less  inconsistent 
with  the  luxurious  character  of  the  Avignon  court  and  with  the 
personal  avarice  of  the  Pope  himself.  He  was  supported  by  the 
Dominicans  in  condemning  as  heretics  the  Fraticelli,  who  in  their 
turn  gave  their  support  to  the  Emperor  Lewis.  Another  theo- 
logical war  was  waged  in  defence  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Beatific 
Vision,  which  nearly  broke  the  connection  between  the  Papacy 
and  France.     John  laid  down  the  doctrine  that  the  dead  are  not 


THE  BABYLONISH  CAPTIVITY  207 

admitted  to  the  presence  of  God  until  after  the  Day  of  Judgment. 
Storms  of  opposition  greeted  his  assertion  and  he  was  obliged  in 
the  end  to  retract  it  on  his  deathbed.  To  the  men  of  the  four- 
teenth centiu-y  theology  was  not  only  an  absorbing  study,  it  was 
also  the  recognised  mental  exercise  and  fashionable  amusement. 
So  round  the  contest  of  Lewis  of  Bavaria  with  the  Papacy  there 
gathered  metaphysical  storm-clouds  and  among  the  ranks  of  the 
warriors  we  find  the  thinkers,  sacred  and  profane,  doctrinaires 
and  theologians,  who  delighted  to  bring  their  opinions  on  to  the 
battlefield  or  rejoiced  to  find  a  market  for  them  in  the  camp  of 
Lewis  or  at  the  court  of  Avignon. 

Before  the  struggle  with  Philip  le  Bel  had  stripped  the 
glamour  from  the  mediaeval  Papacy,  Thomas  Aquinas  gave  a  new 
meaning  to  history  by  interpreting  it  in  the  light  of  Aristotle's 
teleology.  The  mediaeval  Empire  had  died  a  lingering  death 
with  the  fall  of  the  House  of  Hohenstaufen :  the  ghost  which 
survived  it  was  being  raffled  among  insignificant  princes.  It 
was  to  come  to  life  again  hereafter  as  the  white  elephant  of  the 
House  of  Hapsburg.  In  the  attempt  of  the  Popes  to  usurp  the 
glories  of  their  defeated  rivals,  the  forces  by  which  they  had 
won  recoiled  upon  themselves.  The  abuses  which  had  been 
heaped  upon  the  theory  of  the  Empire  could  apply  quite  as  well 
to  the  temporal  power  of  the  Papacy.  Innocent  III.  showed 
that  he  realised  this  danger  when  he  insisted  that  the  Emperor, 
although  subordinate  to  the  Pope,  was  not  subordinate  to  any- 
one else.  But  the  doorway  to  criticism  was  open  when  Thomas 
Aquinas  stood  on  the  threshold,  and  directed  the  old  contro- 
versies into  the  new  highway  of  political  philosophy.  He 
introduced  a  new  way  of  approaching  the  old  problems  by 
defending  the  power  of  the  Popes  on  the  basis  of  teleology. 
"The  State  comes  into  existence,"  says  Aristotle,  "originating 
in  the  needs  of  life,  and  continues  in  existence  for  the  sake  of 
good  life  "  ("  Politics,"  i.  2).  If  the  end  of  government  is  the  good 
life  of  the  governed,  then,  according  to  Aquinas,  the  supreme 
authority  of  the  Papacy  is  not  only  justifiable,  but  essential,  in 
order  that  men  should  believe  rightly.  For  the  one  essential 
condition  for  "the  good  life,"  to  the  mediaeval  mind,  was  a  right 
faith.  As  the  guardians  of  "  the  good  life  "  the  Popes  need  fear 
no  rival,  but  for  their  secular  defenders  they  must  look — not  to 
the  efi'ete  and  once  presumptuous  Empire — but  to  the  rising 
spirit  of  nationality.  This  new  philosophical  basis  of  papal 
power  was  stronger  than  the  old  Biblical  warrants  which  the 
Popes  had  been  wont  to  produce.  Controversy  had  already 
shown  that  texts  could  be  applied  by  human  ingenuity  in  more 


208    A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

ways  than  one.  And  yet  the  defence  of  St.  Thomas  is  most  con- 
vincing where  it  is  least  needed ;  it  was  not  in  its  capacity  of 
guardian  of  "the  good  life"  that  the  Papacy  most  required 
vindication,  and  the  time  was  not  far  distant  when  the  words  of 
Aristotle,  applied  to  the  Avi2;non  Popes,  would  sound  like  irony. 

Thomas  Aquinas  had  not  stemmed  the  tide  of  criticism : 
he  had  merely  diverted  its  stream.  Dante,  writing  his  "  De 
Monarchia"  a  little  later,  reverted  to  the  older  method  in  his 
counter-attack,  but  the  spirit  which  he  infused  into  his  anti- 
quated argument  is  somehow  alive  and  modern.  He  grounds 
his  support  of  the  Empire  on  Christ's  historic  birth  under  the 
Roman  Empire,  which,  he  maintains,  gave  divine  sanction  once 
and  for  all  to  the  Imperial  principle,  and  precluded  the  Church 
from  its  claim  to  dominion.  "  De  Monarchia"  was  not  a  very 
successful  pamphlet :  it  was  an  attempt  "  to  exchange  one 
impossible  theory  for  another  equally  impossible,"  and  the 
system  which  it  advocated  had  too  lately  fallen  for  an  im- 
mediate revival.  But  Dante's  political  theory  is  more  important 
than  his  contribution  to  contemporary  history :  it  reveals  a 
sense  of  the  dignity  of  human  nature  which  carries  it  into  the 
atmosphere  of  the  "  Divina  Commedia".  Naturally,  Dante  pre- 
serves in  his  political  writings  the  poet's  faculty  of  ennobling 
politics,  and  his  views  are  not  the  less  interesting  because  they 
are  representative  rather  than  revolutionary. 

At  this  point  the  interaction  of  politics  and  theology  pro- 
duced a  literary  storm.  ^Egidio  Colonna  showed  that  both  the 
rival  powers  came  independently  from  God,  and  John  of  Paris 
used  this  useful  theory  to  prove  that  the  Pope  had  no  right  to 
control  the  policy  of  France.  Now,  as  ever,  Paris  was  in  the 
forefront  of  the  intellectual  movement,  and  the  fearless  delicacy 
of  the  Latin  mind  was  busy  defining  and  interpreting  the  various 
phases  of  the  dawning  Reformation.  The  imagination  of  Du 
Bois  exalted  the  kingdom  of  France  to  the  supremacy  which 
Empire  and  Papacy  had  forfeited.  His  remarkable  books  register 
the  first  protest  against  the  double  use  of  Scriptural  texts,  in 
their  literal  and  their  metaphorical  application,  as  historical 
arguments  in  the  great  contest.  It  was  Michael  of  Cesena,  the 
general  of  the  Franciscan  Order,  who  definitely  linked  the 
philosophical  dispute  to  the  theological  quarrel,  by  attacking 
the  Papacy  on  Franciscan  principles,  appealing  to  "the  uni- 
versal  Church  and  General  Council,  which  in  faith  and  morals 
is  superior  to  any  Pope  ".  It  is  easy  to  understand  the  fierce 
intolerance  felt  by  these  early  Socialists  for  the  existent  hier- 
archy and  all  its  works.     The  Chm'ch  had  lost  its  hold  on  the 


THE  BABYLONISH  CAPTIVITY  209 

poor,  and  the  world's  accumulation  of  sufifering  unheeded  cried 
aloud  against  Avignon  as  a  travesty  of  the  Christian  ideal. 
The  result  was  that  the  men  of  the  early  fourteenth  century 
turned  more  and  more  to  first  principles,  examining  the  founda- 
tions of  Catholicism  in  the  light  of  the  stupendous  inconsis- 
tency. William  of  Ockham,  the  "  invincible  doctor,"  turned 
aside  from  the  path  of  scholastic  theology  to  take  up  the 
absorbing  problem,  claiming  by  his  "Dialogues"  and  "Tractates" 
a  direct  influence  on  the  sixteenth  century.  His  work  is  a 
curious  mixture  of  general  principles  and  details  of  conflict. 
Much  of  his  argument  is  merely  a  restatement  of  the  case 
against  John  XXII.  from  the  Franciscan  point  of  view.  He 
does  not  pretend  to  offer  a  complete  system,  but  his  chief  con- 
tribution consists  in  the  attempt  to  distinguish  between  the 
temporal  or  earthly  element  in  the  Catholic  ideal,  and  the 
divine  and  eternal  truth  underlying  it. 

In  William's  disciple  and  literary  forerunner,  Marsiglio  of 
Padua,  the  literary  war  reached  its  culminating  point.  Among 
the  group  of  great  thinkers  who  were  his  contemporaries,  he 
alone  stands  out  as  a  prophet,  one  to  whom  to-day  was  as  clear 
as  yesterday,  and  from  whom  to-morrow  has  much  to  learn. 
He,  with  his  colleague,  John  of  Jandun,  both  professors  of  Paris, 
brought  forward  in  1326  "  Defensor  Pacis  " — a  treatise  in  poli- 
tical philosophy  which  foreshadows  the  main  principles  of 
modern  political  thought.  In  1327,  they  both  left  the  university, 
and  offered  their  intellects  and  energies  to  Lewis  of  Bavaria, 
who  had  good  sense  enough  to  appreciate  the  value  of  the  gifts 
which  they  brought  him.  From  that  point  Marsiglio  became 
the  inspiration  of  a  policy  foredoomed  to  failure  by  the  hopeless 
inefficiency  of  the  men  to  whom  it  was  entrusted.  Like  the 
condottieri  of  the  next  period,  the  philosophers  of  the  fourteenth 
century  sent  their  powers  to  market,  and  in  an  age  when 
intellect  was  marketable,  they  seldom  met  with  rejection.  Lewis 
had  more  mental  ability  than  force  of  character.  He  eagerly 
adopted  Marsiglio's  suggestion  that  he  should  fight  the  Pope  with 
the  Pope's  own  weapons.  Other  Emperors,  such  as  Frederick  II., 
had  come  to  grief  because  they  had  answered  craft  with  violence, 
words  with  deeds.  Let  Lewis  wage  intellectual  war  on  John  from 
a  position  equally  tenable,  with  weapons  equally  strong,  and 
as  yet  untarnished  by  age-long  use.  In  his  contest  with  the 
I^'ranciscans,  John  had  used  equivocal  language,  to  which  a 
little  skill  could  give  an  heretical  interpretation.  He  was 
personally  unpopular,  and  officially  defamed:  the  eyes  of 
Europe   looked   askance    at   Avignon.       Thomas  Aquinas   had 

14 


210    A  SHOBT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

made  Aristotle  a  bulwark  of  papal  power :  Marsiglio  used  him 
as  a  battering-ram.  He  accepts  the  teleological  view  of  the 
State  as  a  community  with  an  end,  the  good  life,  but  he  goes  on 
to  make  the  extraordinarily  modern  discovery  that  the  legislator 
is  the  people,  from  whom  the  ruler  derives  his  authority  as  by 
a  tacit  investiture.  As  to  the  ruler  himself,  Marsiglio  is  modern 
enough  to  leave  the  question  open.  Unity  there  must  be,  but 
unity  of  office  and  not  necessarily  in  number  :  a  committee  could 
serve  the  purpose,  but  perhaps  on  the  whole  a  king  is  best. 

So  far,  "  Defensor  Pacis  "  shines  like  a  beacon  across  the  cen- 
turies, warning  the  world  of  changes  to  come  and  lightening  the 
surroundings  with  the  flame  of  discovery.  But  the  most  im- 
portant part  of  his  argument  passed  unchallenged  at  the  time. 
After  three  and  a  half  centuries  Locke  reached  the  same  point 
by  a  more  circuitous  route,  and  Rousseau  carried  the  argument 
further  to  its  logical  conclusion.  But  the  contemporaries  of 
Marsiglio  were  more  interested  in  him  as  a  pamphleteer,  and  it 
is  to  the  temporary  application  of  his  argument  that  he  owes 
his  fame  in  the  practical  world.  The  Pope,  the  hierarchy,  and 
all  the  paraphernalia  of  spiritual  power  were  outside  his  political 
system :  they  were  the  friction  which  disturbed  the  normal 
political  life — the  enemies  of  the  peace  which  the  de  facto  ruler, 
the  Emperor,  was  there  to  defend.  Their  rights  had  been  seized 
and  not  conferred :  Christ  had  neither  exercised  nor  bestowed 
"  coercive  jurisdiction  "  among  the  Apostles,  and  so  far  from  the 
priests  exerting  this  right,  the  lay  authority  ought  to  appoint 
and  control  the  priesthood.  The  power  of  the  Pope  rested  on 
no  valid  Scriptural  authority,  but  on  the  respect  which  Rome  had 
inherited  from  the  Roman  Empire.  It  was  not  even  justified 
by  success,  for  the  rule  of  the  Popes  had  not  contributed  to  the 
general  good,  and  its  failure  was  written  large  on  the  walls  of 
Avignon. 

If  we  compare  Marsiglio  with  other  thinkers  of  the  Middle 
Ages,  it  is  at  first  surprising  that  a  man  of  such  outstanding 
genius  should  have  affected  so  little  the  course  of  contemporary 
thought.  William  of  Ockham,  with  far  less  penetration  of 
insight,  is  much  more  often  quoted,  and  his  narrower  doctrines 
found  a  wider  acceptance  among  his  political  partisans.  It  is 
probable  that  William  evolved  his  theory  out  of  his  politics, 
whereas  it  is  obvious  that  Marsiglio,  in  identifying  himself  with 
Lewis  and  his  cause,  was  seeking  an  expression  of  a  philosophical 
ideal.  His  criticism  of  the  papal  position  was  only  one  depart- 
ment, and  that  a  subordinate  one,  of  his  view  of  the  universe. 
But  in   1326,   a  philosophical   system   was   incomparably   less 


THE  BABYLONISH  CAPTIVITY  211 

important  than  a  good  argument  against  the  Pope.  So  the 
founders  of  Protestantism  sought  among  the  narrower  doctrines 
of  William  of  Ockham  and  found  what  they  wanted,  while  they 
left  the  broad  and  confident  truths  of  Marsiglio  of  Padua  for  a 
more  adventurous  age  to  explore. 

Of  course  the  lire  of  the  critics  was  returned  from  the  papal 
camp.  Unfortunately  for  John  XXII.,  his  champions,  in  their 
frantic  efforts  to  find  something  new  to  say — some  argument 
which  had  not  already  spent  its  force — were  driven  to  unwise 
and  absurd  exaggeration.  Agostino  Trionfo  and  Alvaro  Pelago 
restated  the  fiction  of  the  Donation,  and  tried  to  prove  the  validity 
of  the  Translation  of  the  Empire  from  the  unquestionable  actual- 
ity of  the  coronation  of  Charlemagne.  The  Pope,  it  was  argued, 
could  not  have  transferred  what  was  not,  in  the  first  place,  his. 
Trionfo  wrote  a  book  dedicated  to  John  XXII.  in  which  papal 
pretension  was  made  ridiculous  in  the  eyes  of  Europe  by  the 
strain  to  which  it  was  exposed.  The  Pope's  judgment  was  the 
judgment  of  God,  and  the  whole  existence  of  the  civil  state  was 
on  sufferance  by  ecclesiastical  consent.  It  was  impossible  that 
such  arguments  could  bridge  the  gulf  which  had  already  opened 
between  John  XXII.  and  Lewis  of  Bavaria,  while  they  merely 
acted  as  fuel  to  the  fire  of  literary  enthusiasm. 

The  coup  d'etat  of  Lewis  which  Marsiglio  had  planned 
proved  a  disastrous  failure.  He  was  to  put  his  views  into  effect 
by  an  expedition  to  Rome — to  take  Italy  into  his  confidence  for 
a  concerted  attack  on  the  Papacy.  Up  to  a  certain  point,  Italy 
was  with  him.  The  Roman  people  welcomed  him  as  Senator, 
with  their  hearts  inflamed  against  the  Pope  who  had  deserted 
them.  In  January,  1328,  he  was  anointed  by  two  schismatic 
Bishops,  and  crowned  in  the  name  of  the  Roman  people  by  that 
useful  rebel,  Sciarra  Colonna.  It  seemed  as  if  Rome  meant  to 
excel  itself  to  do  honour  to  the  democratic  Emperor.  And  yet, 
in  spite  of  the  processions  and  banquets,  and  the  elaborate  care 
in  preserving  the  customary  ritual,  the  democratic  coronation 
fell  rather  flat.  Perhaps  there  is  always  a  certain  lack  of  dignity 
in  a  democratic  pageant,  arising  from  some  inherent  inconsist- 
ency between  the  ideal  and  its  expression.  Or  it  may  be  that 
Lewis  did  not  really  quite  believe  in  what  he  was  doing.  It  is 
certain  that  many  of  the  witnesses  felt  qualms,  in  spite  of  the 
brave  words  of  defiance,  and  Villani,  the  historian,  expressed  a 
prevalent  opinion  in  the  following  words  :  "  In  this  manner  was 
Lewis  the  Bavarian  crowned  Emperor  by  the  people  of  Rome,  to 
the  great  disgrace  and  offence  of  the  Pope  and  the  Holy  Church. 
What  presumption   in   the   accursed   Bavarian !      Nowhere  in 


212  A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

history  do  we  find  that  an  Emperor,  however  hostile  to  the  Pope 
he  may  have  been  before,  or  may  afterwards  have  become,  ever 
allowed  himself  to  be  crowned  by  anyone  but  the  Pope  or  his 
legates,  with  the  single  exception  of  this  Bavarian;  and  the 
fact  excited  great  astonishment."  (Villani,  x.,  55.  Quoted  by 
Greg.,  bk.  xi.,  ch.  3.) 

John  XXII.  left  none  of  the  usual  stones  unturned  in  oppos- 
ing Lewis,  but  his  real  advantage  lay  in  the  Emperor's  striking 
inefficiency,  and  his  conspicuous  power  of  wasting  time.  Lewis 
was  also  harassed  on  all  sides  by  his  supporters,  and  he  lacked 
the  powers  necessary  to  control  the  democratic  forces  which 
were  driving  him  on.  The  Romans  insisted  on  his  deposing 
John  XXII.  and  stipulated  that  future  Popes  should  not  leave 
Rome,  except  for  the  three  summer  months,  without  the  per- 
mission of  the  Roman  people.  A  senseless  persecution  of  the 
clergy  was  carried  on  in  Rome,  in  spite  of  the  presence  of 
Marsiglio  of  Padua,  the  discoverer  of  toleration.  Finally,  the 
Minorites  clamoured  for  an  anti-pope,  and  secured  one  in  Peter 
of  Corbara,  who,  in  May,  1328,  took  the  name  of  Nicholas  V. 
Peter,  the  unworthy  follower  of  Celestine  V.,  showed  from  the 
first  a  complete  inaptitude  for  the  part  of  anti-pope.  He  spent 
his  short  months  of  power  in  blustering  against  the  Avignon 
Pope :  at  the  first  sign  of  danger  he  fled,  and  when  he  was 
sold  back  to  his  enemies  he  grovelled  for  mercy,  to  end  his  in- 
glorious life  in  an  Avignon  prison  three  years  after  his  sub- 
mission. 

Everything  went  against  Lewis  from  the  moment  of  his 
departure  from  Rome  in  August,  1328.  While  the  Neapolitan 
forces,  under  King  Robert,  were  recovering  Rome  and  the  Cam- 
pagna  for  John  XXIL,  Lewis  dawdled  about  preparing  suits 
against  the  Papacy,  and  fitfully  asserting  his  power  in  North 
Italy.  The  picturesque  and  successful  criminal,  Castruccio 
Castracane,  tyrant  of  Lucca,  died  in  September  in  the  course  of 
a  quarrel  with  Lewis  which  threatened  to  break  up  the  unity  of 
the  Ghibelline  party.  Foremost  among  the  Ghibelline  leaders 
who  had  invited  Lewis  to  Italy,  Castruccio  had  encroached  on 
the  Emperor's  own  rights,  and,  at  his  death,  Lewis  was  involved 
in  a  fight  with  his  sons  over  the  possession  of  Florence  and  Pisa. 
At  this  critical  moment  a  mutiny  broke  out  among  the  Imperial 
troops.  Rinaldo  d'Este  and  Azzo  Visconti,  fearing  to  suffer  the 
fate  of  the  Castracani,  submitted  to  Avignon,  and  thus  withdrew 
from  Lewis  the  allegiance  of  Ferrara  and  of  Milan.  Further 
deaths  among  the  Ghibelline  tyrants,  and  among  them  that  of 
Sciarra  Colonna,  convinced  Lewis  that  he  was  beaten,  and  con- 


THE  BABYLONISH  CAPTIVITY  213 

firmed  John  XXII.  in  the  impression  that  Heaven  was  on  his 
side.  Lewis  left  Italy,  Rome  tendered  its  submission  to  John, 
and  the  anti-pope  appeared  at  Avignon  with  a  cord  round  his 
neck.  It  was  not  surprising  that,  in  1330,  the  Pope  could  aflbrd 
to  take  a  high  line  with  the  Emperor ;  the  offer  of  Lewis  to  de- 
pose the  anti-pope  was  met  by  a  stinging  retort  which  must 
have  sealed  his  humiliation. 

At  this  point,  history  seems  to  be  full  of  surprising  personali- 
ties, whose  meteoric  careers  shed  a  fictitious  brilliance  across 
the  narrative.  Among  these,  the  knight-errant,  John  of 
Bohemia,  was  conspicuous,  and  his  chivalrous  expedition  to 
recover  Italy  for  the  Pope,  relieves  the  inglorious  story  of  the 
last  struggle  between  the  Empire  and  Papacy,  His  sudden  and 
unexplained  appearance,  the  panic  which  he  struck  among  the 
Ghibelline  tyrants,  the  brave  exploits  of  his  16-year-old  son, 
and  the  mysterious  failure  in  which  he  vanished  "like  smoke" 
across  the  Alps — these  things  thread  with  colour  a  narrative 
otherwise  lacking  in  interest. 

If  Lewis  was  not  born  to  succeed,  neither  was  John  XXII. 
All  the  pettiness  of  a  subtle  nature  was  his,  and  his  reign 
smouldered  out  in  an  incompleteness  more  inglorious  than 
failure.  Romagna  was  imperfectly  subdued,  and  the  Gascon 
regents  whom  John  appointed,  and  particularly  his  nephew 
Beltram,  were  a  cause  of  growing  irritation.  In  1334,  Bologna 
openly  rebelled,  and  the  citizens  raised  the  cry  of  "  Death  to  the 
legate  and  the  men  of  Languedoc  ".  The  spiritual  forces  also 
gathered  against  the  disappointed  old  worldling :  another  ex- 
pedition of  Flagellants  under  Fra  Ventiu'ino  stirred  Italy  against 
him,  and  his  last  act  was  the  condemnation  of  its  leader  at 
Avignon.  John  XXII.  died  in  December,  1334,  at  the  age  of 
9U.  His  pontificate  bore  the  impress  of  his  own  character.  It 
had  passed  in  an  unworthy  struggle  for  an  outworn  and  worth- 
less dominion,  and  such  as  it  was  it  had  failed  to  conclude  it. 
He  was  a  pedantic-minded  lawyer,  who  might  have  led  a  useful 
life  in  a  mediaeval  university  or  a  provincial  town.  As  Pope,  he 
had  sown  doctrinal  discord  in  the  world,  just  as  Boniface  VIII. 
had  sown  political  strife,  and,  in  doing  so,  he  had  robbed  the 
Catholic  Church  of  her  dignity  in  the  eyes  of  Europe.  His  very 
virtues  lacked  distinction :  his  scholarship  was  narrow  and 
dogmatic,  his  personal  simplicity  counterbalanced  by  his  enor- 
mous riches  exposed  him  to  the  charge  of  avarice,  while  his 
pugnacity  was  not  justified  by  a  successful  military  policy. 
Papal  history  cannot  afford  to  be  lenient  to  John  XXII.,  for,  in 
his  reign,  the  Reformation  as  an  intellectual  movement  began. 


214  A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

It  would  be  absurd  to  hold  him  responsible  for  the  spirit  of 
criticism  which  dominated  his  age,  but  contemporary  Church- 
men must  have  had  good  reason  to  regret  that  the  sword-thrusts 
of  the  enemy  could  so  easily  get  home  through  the  weaknesses 
in  the  character  of  the  Pope  and  his  court. 


CHAPTER  XX 
WHEN  ISRAEL  CAME  OUT  OF  EGYPT,  a.d.  1334-1370 

BY  the  time  of  the  death  of  John  XXII.,  the  Popes  had 
thoroughly  exhausted  the  advantages  of  the  Avignon 
position.  From  1334  onwards  the  interest  of  the  story 
lies  m  the  growing  attraction  towards  Rome  and  the  gradual 
extrication  from  the  toils  of  French  bondage.  For  seven  years 
Benedict  XII.  (1335-1342)  gave  himself  with  single-hearted  zeal 
to  the  task  of  uprooting  the  evils  which  John  XXII.  had  sown. 
He  did  everything  that  an  upright  strong  man  could  do,  but 
success  was  not  within  his  reach.  There  seemed  good  hope  of 
ending  the  weary  struggle  with  Lewis  at  the  beginning  of  his 
reign.  But  Lewis,  though  he  was  subservient  enough  on  most 
points,  clung  obstinately  to  his  alliance  with  England,  and 
Philip  VI.  threatened  to  treat  Benedict  worse  than  his  grand- 
father had  treated  Boniface  VIII.  if  he  gave  way  to  the  ally  of 
the  enemy  of  France.  Benedict  dared  not  oppose  Philip,  and 
this  fresh  proof  of  the  "  captivity  "  of  the  Pope  so  far  improved 
the  position  of  the  Emperor  that  in  1338  the  Declaration  of 
Reuse  gave  constitutional  confirmation  to  the  advanced  Ghibel- 
line  doctrine,  that  the  Emperor  derived  his  title  from  God  alone, 
and  that  whoever  was  elected  King  of  the  Romans  could  use 
Imperial  rights  without  waiting  for  papal  sanction.  Of  course 
the  actual  circumstances  belied  the  brave  words,  for  the  Empire 
was  never  more  powerless,  and  the  Papacy  had  many  another 
humiliation  to  impose  upon  it.  But  the  Declaration  of  Reuse, 
as  a  spontaneous  protest  against  interference,  is  a  more  im- 
portant national  document  than  a  charter  of  liberty  would  be,  if 
proclaimed  by  a  strong  Emperor  at  the  zenith  of  his  power. 

Unfortunately  for  Lewis,  he  had  no  sense  of  "  the  tide  in  the 
affairs  of  men,"  and  a  few  years  later  he  created  a  reaction 
against  himself  by  his  folly  in  dissolving  the  marriage  of 
Margaret  Maultasch  in  order  that  she  might  marry  his  own  son. 
He  could  plead  with  perfect  justice  that  he  was  only  carrying 
the  theories  of  Marsiglio  one  step  fui'ther  in  thus  acting  as  if  he 
was  the  fountain  of  morality.  But  his  supporters  were  not  yet 
prepared  to  see  spiritual  powers  wielded  by  a  layman :  they  would 

216 


216    A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

follow  him  in  asserting  his  rights  against  the  capricious  policy 
of  the  Avignon  Popes,  but  when  he  began  to  adopt  the  Pope's 
own  evil  ways — to  use  a  more  than  doubtful  spiritual  authority 
to  serve  an  end  which  was  frankly  worldly,  the  weakness  of  the 
Emperor's  position  stood  revealed.  For  the  first  time  the  views 
of  Marsiglio  and  Ockham  began  to  be  regarded  as  dangerous, 
and  Europe,  now  on  its  guard,  was  slow  in  giving  its  allegiance 
to  the  new  principles.  Where  Benedict  had  failed  as  a  peace- 
maker his  successor  was  not  likely  to  succeed.  Clement  VI.  was 
not  a  man  of  compromise  :  he  pursued  the  unfortunate  Emperor 
back  across  all  the  ground  he  had  won,  made  him  unsay  all  his 
rash  words  of  defiance,  and,  finally,  set  up  Charles  of  Bohemia 
against  him.  Lewis  died  in  1347,  having  spent  his  fitful  energies 
in  the  most  futile  of  all  the  struggles  between  the  Empire  and 
the  Papacy.  Charles  IV.  outlived  him,  but  he  never  managed 
to  assert  himself  against  the  Popes,  whose  creature  he  was,  and 
Germany  treated  him  accordingly. 

More  than  once  Benedict  XII.  had  tried  to  efifect  the  return 
to  Rome.  But  he  failed,  as  his  three  successors  were  to  fail, 
owing  to  the  strength  of  the  pressure  of  France  on  the  one  hand, 
and,  on  the  other,  the  natural  reluctance  of  the  Cardinals  to  go 
back  to  the  city  of  anarchy.  So  Italy  was  left  in  the  hands  of 
the  Ghibelline  tyrants,  and  the  bitterness  of  the  land  against 
the  Popes  increased  in  proportion  as  the  evils  of  tyranny  and 
private  war  oppressed  it.  A  pathetic  confidence  is  expressed  in 
Italian  literature  of  the  time,  that,  if  only  the  Popes  were  to 
return,  all  would  be  well  with  Italy.  The  memory  of  Latin 
countries  is  short-lived  and  forgiving.  In  the  consciousness  of 
present  evils  past  troubles  were  forgotten.  The  great  Popes  had 
given  Italy  golden  days  of  renown ;  they  had  made  Rome  the 
heart  of  the  world  and  upheld  the  tradition  of  her  "  eternity  ". 
In  the  remembrance  of  these  things  the  wars  which  had  de- 
vastated Italy  were  forgotten  :  so  were  the  extortions  of  the  Curia 
and  the  scandals  which  had  already  defamed  the  Vatican  court. 
But  the  sighs  of  the  Romans,  though  not  unheeded,  were  in 
vain,  and  Petrarch,  his  heart  aflame  with  worship  and  pity  for 
Rome,  flung  his  poetic  appeals  to  Avignon,  believing  that  the 
Pope  had  only  to  know  of  Italy's  sufi'ering  in  order  to  come  and 
deliver  her.  With  consternation  the  news  reached  Rome  in 
1339  that  Benedict  was  building  a  great  palace  in  Avignon,  and 
that  French  craftsmen  were  at  work  adorning  it :  it  confirmed 
their  worst  fears,  for  it  seemed  as  though  the  domination  of 
France  was  not  after  all  an  episode  in  papal  history,  but  a  con- 
summated revolution. 


WHEN  ISKAEL  CAME  OUT  OF  EGYPT         217 

The  Babylonish  captivity  had  the  strange  effect  of  arousing 
in  the  Romans  a  sense  of  civic  dignity,  partly  genuine  and 
largely  artificial,  founded  on  an  epidemic  of  antiquarianism  and 
personified  in  the  fantastic  figure  of  Cola  di  Rienzi.  Clement  VI. 
(1342-1352)  found  himself  more  firmly  established  than  ever  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  France,  and  the  Romans  turned,  in  their 
sense  of  desertion,  to  "  the  tragic  actor  in  the  tattered  purple  of 
antiquity".  In  1342,  a  strange  and  beautiful  young  man  ap- 
peared at  Avignon  as  an  envoy  from  the  Roman  people,  to 
implore  Clement  to  return.  Though  his  mission  was  unsuc- 
cessful, for  Rienzi,  the  messenger,  it  was  a  personal  triumph. 
His  wonderful  language  and  his  strange  magnetic  charm  won 
the  worldling  Pope,  who  sent  him  back  to  Rome  high  in  favour 
as  a  papal  notary  and  in  the  company  of  a  papal  Vicar,  thus 
enabling  him  to  claim  the  approval  of  Avignon  for  his  earliest 
exploits.  The  career  of  Rienzi  belongs  to  the  civic  history  of 
Rome,  but  the  amazing  success  of  his  irregular  dictatorship  at 
the  opening,  and  the  social  upheaval  caused  by  his  eventual 
failure,  show  how  strong  were  the  rival  forces  with  which  the 
Papacy  had  to  contend.  The  Romans  had  been  living  for 
centui'ies  under  conditions  which  were  calculated  to  rob  them 
of  all  political  self-respect.  And  yet,  in  spite  of  their  dependence 
on  the  Popes,  alternating  as  it  did  with  periods  of  oppression  by 
the  baronage,  they  had  never  quite  forgotten  the  civic  heritage 
which  came  to  them  from  a  remoter  past.  This  consciousness, 
which  was  kept  alive  by  the  palaces  of  the  Palatine  Hill  and 
the  temples  of  the  Forum,  was  always  breaking  out  in  eruptions 
of  more  or  less  genuine  democratic  revolt.  Three  times  in 
history  these  movements  extended  beyond  the  civic  policy  of 
Rome :  the  revolution  inspired  by  Arnold  of  Brescia  in  the 
twelfth  century  involved  the  Emperor  and  the  Pope,  and  its 
consequences  were  felt  throughout  Europe.  In  the  fifteenth 
century  Stephen  Porcara  conducted  a  conspiracy  against  Pope 
Nicholas  V.  in  the  name  of  civic  liberty  which  for  the  mo- 
ment overthrew  the  political  balance  of  Italy.  But  the  most 
astonishing  and  the  least  accountable  of  the  Republican  epidemics 
was  the  "  Buono  Stato"  of  Rienzi.  His  code  of  laws,  proclaimed 
from  the  Capitol,  shows  real  administrative  power,  which  belies 
the  theory  that  he  was  a  mere  masquerader  with  an  instinct  for 
dramatic  effect  and  a  demagogue's  gift  of  persuasion.  The  thing 
which  is  surprising  is  that  the  originator  of  the  Buono  Stato 
have  shown  so  little  stability  and  so  great  an  inherent  capability 
of  deterioration. 

The  democratic  revolution  was  watched  from  Avignon  at  first 


218  A  SHOET  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

with  approval,  afterwards  with  suspicion,  and,  finally,  with 
active  hostility.  It  was  natural  that  the  Pope  should  be  well- 
disposed  towards  a  movement  avowedly  hostile  to  the  power  of 
the  Roman  nobles.  The  Colonna  and  the  Orsini,  contemptuous 
at  first  of  the  noisy  and  rather  vulgar  proceedings,  were  forced 
to  take  them  seriously  when  they  found  their  houses  besieged 
by  the  mob,  their  defences  prohibited  by  law,  and  their  persons 
proscribed  by  the  Tribune ;  their  submission  exercised  an  influ- 
ence beyond  the  walls  of  Rome.  The  country  nobles  followed 
their  lead,  and  Lewis  of  Hungary  and  Joanna  of  Naples  called 
on  Rienzi  to  arbitrate  in  their  quarrel.  For  a  moment  Europe 
was  dazzled  by  the  dream  of  Rome's  ancient  splendour,  which 
Rienzi  had  compounded  from  his  knowledge  of  classical  litera- 
ture and  his  own  fiery  imagination.  Then  came  rumours  of 
strange  patriotic  orgies  in  the  new-born  Republic.  Rienzi, 
the  self-styled  Tribune,  was  bathing  ceremoniously  in  the  por- 
phyry font  of  Constantine,  and  crowning  himself  with  the  Seven 
Crowns  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  reports  of  the  Tribune  which 
reached  Avignon  did  not  stop  short  at  mere  exhibitions  of 
vanity.  Sinister  accounts  of  treachery  were  mingled  with 
fantastic  stories  of  brutal  cowardice.  Clearly  the  days  of  the 
Buono  Stato  were  numbered.  Clement's  answer  to  the  imperi- 
ous demand  of  the  Tribune  for  his  return  was  to  send  a  legate 
with  a  writ  of  excommunication  to  denounce  Rienzi  as  a  heretic. 
As  the  declared  enemy  of  the  Papacy,  Rienzi  lost  what  semblance 
of  authoritative  sanction  he  had  hitherto  been  able  to  parade. 
He  had  already  forfeited  the  confidence  of  his  immediate  sup- 
porters. After  seven  months  of  glorification,  therefore,  the 
Buono  Stato  fell.  Roman  Republicanism  sank  back  into  the 
ruins  whence  it  had  emerged,  and  the  Tribune  sought  congenial 
shelter  among  the  revolutionary  retreats  of  the  Fraticelli. 

Meanwhile,  Clement  VI.  was  outstripping  all  his  predecessors 
in  zeal  for  the  cause  of  France.  The  English  war  gave  him  a 
special  opportunity  to  be  useful  to  the  French  monarchy.  First 
he  tried  to  prevent  it ;  failing  in  this,  he  interceded  with  England 
after  Cressy  and  Calais ;  finally,  he  granted  an  ecclesiastical 
tenth  to  Philip  VI.  to  help  him  pay  his  way,  and  encouraged 
his  relations  to  give  private  financial  assistance  to  the  French 
barons.  "  Ipse  Francus,  Franco  ferrenter  adhaesit "  is  a  mild 
indication  of  the  direction  of  his  policy.  Moreover,  he  bought 
Avignon  from  Joanna  of  Naples,  and  thus  committed  the 
Papacy  more  irrevocably  than  ever  to  the  domination  of  France. 

While  Clement  was  packing  his  Curia  with  more  French 
Cardinals,  opposition  was  growing  louder  in  Europe,  and  was 


WHEN  ISRAEL  CAME  OUT  OF  EGYPT         219 

naturally  headed  by  the  English.  The  Pope's  desire  for  money 
was  boundless,  and,  in  his  absence  from  Italy,  the  revenues 
from  the  Papal  States  were  negligible.  England  was  conse- 
quently the  chief  "  quarry,"  until  Edward  III.  woke  up  to  the 
fact  that  the  French  soldiers  were  being  paid  by  the  money 
which  left  England  in  the  form  of  papal  dues.  These  were  never 
so  burdensome  or  so  excessive  as  now,  when  the  national  need 
of  money  was  proportionately  greater  than  ever.  Clement  VI. 
might  well  laugh,  and  say  that  his  predecessors  had  not  known 
how  to  be  Popes.  Funds  poured  in  to  Avignon  from  provisions, 
reservations,  and  dispensations.  All  ecclesiastical  rights  which 
it  was  possible  to  lay  hands  on  were  seized  by  the  agents  of  the 
Curia,  In  1343,  two  papal  agents  were  opposed  in  seizing  the 
offices  to  which  Clement  had  appointed  two  of  his  Cardinals. 
Soon  after,  Edward  formally  complained  to  Clement  of  the 
"  army  of  provisors  which  has  invaded  om-  realm  ".  The  Statute 
of  Provisors  of  1351  gave  legal  form  to  the  protest.  Clement's 
need  of  money  was  greater  than  his  discretion,  and  a  clash  of 
authority  was  the  result.  Royal  nominees  defended  their  claims 
in  the  King's  court  while  their  opponents  flaunted  papal  Bulls. 
This  led,  in  1353,  to  the  second  great  anti-papal  Statute  of 
Praemunire,  which  forbade  an  appeal  to  any  foreign  court  on 
pain  of  outlawry.  Of  course,  this  was  only  the  beginning, 
and  not  the  end,  of  the  contest,  but  it  was  a  warning  to  the 
Avignon  Popes  of  a  new  direction  from  which  hostility  might 
be  anticipated.  It  was  the  beginning  of  direct  financial  op- 
position to  the  claims  of  the  Papacy. 

"That  great  and  prodigal  lord,"  Pope  Clement,  was  deluded 
by  a  false  sense  of  security.  The  Emperor,  Lewis,  was  hardly 
ever  dangerous,  and  Charles  IV.  was  docile  to  a  fault.  There 
was  nothing  to  fear  from  France :  the  Queen  of  Naples  knew 
that  absolution  for  her  crimes  had  been  cheap  at  the  price  of 
Avignon.  Italy,  it  is  true,  was  not  in  a  satisfactory  state,  but 
the  loyalty  of  Rome  could  always  be  bought  with  a  promise 
that  the  Papacy  should  return,  and  Rienzi's  fall  had  shown 
that  in  emergency  papal  influence  was  still  predominant  So 
Clement  heaped  riches  on  his  relations,  and  luxury  on  his  court, 
and  looked  the  other  way  when  an  occasional  remonstrance 
reached  him  against  the  more  flagrant  vices  of  his  clergy.  The 
worst  charges  brought  against  the  Avignon  Papacy  were  pro- 
bably true  of  the  pontificate  of  Clement  VI.  The  clergy  were 
luxurious  and  immoral,  and  at  the  papal  court  extravagance 
and  good-living  were  carried  much  too  far.  But  the  Pope  him- 
self was  an  able  man,  whose  worst  fault  was  the  leniency  which 


220  A  SHOET  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

tolerated  such  an  atmosphere.  He  was  a  very  popular  preacher, 
a  successful  diplomatist,  and  above  all  a  kind-hearted  man. 
He  tried  to  protect  the  Jews  against  the  brutal  bigotry  of 
Christendom,  and  even  gave  them  a  place  of  refuge  in  his  Avig- 
non estate.  Such  acts  of  spontaneous  generosity,  sometimes 
impolitic  in  regard  to  his  reputation,  are  characteristic  of  him. 
Perhaps  he  did  not  greatly  care  for  contemporary  good  opinion. 
Certainly  he  was  not  a  hypocrite  :  he  lived  on  a  lavish  scale, 
and  treated  the  world  with  immense  good-humour.  This  was 
his  way  of  showing  Christendom  how  to  be  a  Pope. 

Clement  was  succeeded  by  a  man  who  was  a  complete  con- 
trast to  himself.  Innocent  VI.  (1352-1362)  instantly  began  to  set 
his  house  in  order.  In  the  constitutions  which  he  issued  im- 
mediately after  his  consecration  he  revoked  all  the  irregular 
powers  which  Clement  had  seized.  Commendams  were  for- 
bidden, and  every  priest  was  bound  over  to  personal  residence 
in  his  cure  on  pain  of  excommunication.  He  laid  down  that 
preferment  was  to  be  the  reward  of  merit  alone  since  "  ecclesi- 
astical dignities  should  follow  virtue  and  not  birth  ".  Conster- 
nation must  have  reigned  among  the  satellites  of  the  Avignon 
court  as  they  watched  the  transformation  from  the  reign  of 
licence  to  the  rule  of  austerity. 

Painstaking  as  he  was.  Innocent  was  not  a  successful  poli- 
tician. His  relations  with  Charles  IV.,  which  ought  to  have 
been  an  easy  problem,  were  in  effect  a  failure.  He  seems  to 
have  wanted  money  almost  as  urgently  as  Clement,  and  although 
he  spent  it  in  more  worthy  ways  he  met  with  quite  as  much 
opposition  to  his  demands.  His  efforts  to  levy  a  tenth  in  Ger- 
many were  opposed  in  vigorous  language.  In  the  words  of  the 
Count  Palatine,  "  Stulta  est  mea  sententia  Germanorum  devotio : 
quae  Romanis  vulturibus,  qui  sunt  insatiabiles,cibum  parat". 
Charles  IV.  threw  off  the  mask  of  meekness  and  asked  the  Pope 
why  he  did  not  first  reform  the  morals  of  the  clergy.  In  1356, 
the  Golden  Bull  of  the  Empire  dealt  a  direct  blow  at  the  Papacy 
which  had  long  been  imminent.  The  declarations  of  Reuse  and 
Frankfort  had  already  proclaimed  that  the  fourteenth  century 
was  not  going  to  tolerate  papal  interference  in  imperial  elections. 
But  the  Golden  Bull  was  to  be  a  fixed  and  fundamental  law  of 
the  German  constitution.  It  nominated  the  seven  Electors  who 
were  from  henceforth  to  choose  the  Emperor,  and  in  defining 
their  powers  and  privileges  the  Pope  was  not  once  mentioned, 
nor  was  there  the  faintest  recognition  of  his  claim,  even  in  the 
form  of  a  denial. 

Thwarted  in  his  financial  demands  in  England  and  in  Ger- 


WHEN  ISRAEL  CAME  OUT  OF  EGYPT         221 

many,  Innocent  began  to  reflect  on  the  troubles  of  Italy  and  in 
particular  on  the  state  of  the  Patrimony.  Avignon  was  no 
longer  the  peaceful  retreat  which  it  once  had  been.  The  French 
wars  had  let  loose  armies  of  mercenaries  in  the  south  of  France, 
and  to  protect  the  papal  court  from  bands  of  freebooters,  Inno- 
cent had  been  obliged  to  build  new  and  expensive  fortifications. 
Moreover,  the  advantages  of  French  protection  were  long  ago  ex- 
hausted, and  Innocent  began  to  look  towards  Rome  with  a 
growing  confidence  which  struck  new  horror  into  the  hearts  of 
the  French  Cardinals.  In  1351  Rienzi  had  reappeared  as  a 
factor  in  politics,  his  fertile  imagination  had  caught  fire  again, 
not  as  before  from  studies  of  antiquity,  but  from  the  strange 
doctrines  of  the  mystic-revolutionists  among  whom  he  had  lived 
for  three  years.  In  common  opposition  to  the  Papacy  the 
Fraticelli  had  found  themselves  associated  with  the  Ghibelline 
philosophers  in  the  camp  of  Lewis  of  Bavaria.  Lewis  was  now 
dead  and  his  place  was  filled  by  the  least  Ghibelline  of  Emper- 
ors, Charles  IV.  To  him  Rienzi  went,  armed  with  prophecies, 
appeals,  and  arguments,  to  persuade  him  to  come  to  Italy,  as 
his  grandfather,  Henry  VIL,  had  come,  to  reform  the  Church  and 
restore  amity  to  the  world.  Charles  was  certainly  interested, 
and  perhaps  a  little  impressed,  by  the  picturesque  and  turbulent 
apparition.  But  he  had  little  in  common  with  this  wild  dreamer 
of  dreams,  and  it  was  dangerous  to  listen  to  his  abuse  of  the 
Pope.  Rienzi's  courage  and  trust  in  Charles  deserved  a  better 
fate  than  imprisonment,  but  the  Bohemian  Emperor  was  bound 
to  the  service  of  Avignon,  and  after  a  year  of  detention  at  Prague, 
Rienzi  was  handed  over  to  the  Pope.  He  was  the  type  of  man 
who  is  noblest  in  times  of  stress  or  of  failure  :  his  head  was  not 
strong  enough  to  stand  success.  At  Prague  and  at  Avignon  he 
behaved  with  the  dignity  of  an  idealist.  He  justified  himself  to 
the  Pope  by  a  curious  succession  of  sophisms  which  he  soon  per- 
suaded himself  to  believe.  But  he  faced  the  probability  of  death 
with  courage,  and  convinced  even  his  enemies  of  the  inherent 
nobility  of  his  nature.  Petrarch,  his  friend  throughout,  de- 
fended him  passionately  both  to  the  Cardinals  and  to  the 
Romans.  These  two  men  were  bound  to  each  other  by  their 
common  idealism  and  love  of  Rome.  Petrarch's  faith  in  Rienzi 
was  strong  enough  to  survive  the  tragedy  of  the  fall  of  the 
Buono  Stato  :  disillusioned  as  he  was  by  the  Tribune's  conduct, 
he  was  ready  to  support  him  again  in  the  second  phase  of  his 
career.  It  is  possible  that  Petrarch  read  his  friend's  character 
in  the  light  of  the  mutual  attraction  of  genius.  He  certainly 
contributed  largely  to  the  influence  which  saved  his  life.     Rienzi 


222  A  SHOUT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

in  prison  at  Avignon,  his  appeals  ringing  in  the  ears  of  the 
GhibelHnes,  his  praises  sung  by  Petrarch  in  words  of  fire,  was  a 
more  dangerous  person  than  Rienzi  playing  the  tyrant  among 
the  ruins  of  the  Forum. 

Meanwhile  the  Romans  were  engaged  in  exalting  a  new 
demagogue,  more  violently  anti-papal  than  ever  Rienzi  had  been. 
Innocent  conceived  the  masterly  plan  of  playing  off  Rienzi 
against  his  inferior  successor,  Baroncelli.  It  had  the  double 
advantage  of  bringing  the  Romans  back  to  papal  allegiance  and 
saving  the  Cardinals  of  Avignon  from  the  necessity  of  condemn- 
ing to  death  a  popular  hero.  The  ingenious  Rienzi  easily 
became  a  Guelph,  and  in  August,  1353,  he  set  out  for  Italy  with 
the  best  statesman  of  the  papal  court. 

In  Cardinal  Albornoz,  Innocent  had  found  the  right  man  for 
the  restoration  of  his  power  in  Italy.  He  had  gained  military 
experience  in  fighting  the  Moors  and  he  soon  showed  diplomatic 
wisdom  in  an  exceptional  degree.  The  expedition  of  Albornoz 
really  amounted  to  a  reconquest  of  papal  Italy,  for  in  the  absence 
of  the  Popes  every  city  of  any  consequence  had  either  yielded 
to  the  local  tyrant,  or  thrown  off  its  allegiance  in  the  name  of 
communal  liberty.  Albornoz  realised  that  the  rights  of  the 
absent  Papacy  made  no  appeal  in  Italy,  and  that  in  order  that 
it  should  win  it  must  be  allied  to  a  principle  more  powerful  than 
itself.  He  therefore  made  common  cause  with  the  spirit  of 
liberty  in  the  towns  against  local  despotism.  The  most  formid- 
able of  his  opponents  was  Bernabo  Visconti,  who  had  made  good 
use  of  the  papal  absence  to  extend  the  boundaries  of  Milan  and 
had  lately  added  the  city  of  Bologna  to  his  plunder.  Bernabo 
was  no  dutiful  son  of  the  Church  to  be  cowed  by  a  curse.  When 
the  legates  were  sent  from  Avignon  to  excommunicate  him  he 
made  them  eat  the  Bull  as  well  as  the  leaden  seal  attached  to  it. 
But  Albornoz  was  brilliantly  successful,  and  in  seven  years  he 
managed  to  win  back  almost  the  whole  of  the  ground  which  had 
been  lost.  The  recovery  of  Bologna  in  1360  was  a  diplomatic 
achievement  which  rounded  oflf  the  cycle  of  victory. 

Rienzi  meanwhile  had  served  his  purpose  in  Rome.  He  had 
drawn  off  the  supporters  of  Baroncelli  and  restored  at  least  the 
nominal  authority  of  the  Popes.  Once  again  his  love  of  drama 
proved  fatal  to  him.  He  played  the  Senator  as  crudely  as  he  had 
played  the  Tribune,  and  the  spell  of  his  personality  seems  to 
have  lost  its  hold  on  the  Roman  imagination.  His  execution  of 
Italy's  best  condottiere,  Fra  Moreale,  led  to  a  mob  rising,  in  the 
course  of  which  he  was  assassinated.  His  death  was  probably  a 
relief  to  Innocent,  who  would  almost  certainly  have  met  with 


WHEN  ISRAEL  CAME  OUT  OF  EGYPT  223 

further  difficulties  at  the  hands  of  the  clever  enfant  terrible  who 
had  at  last  ended  his  masquerade. 

The  work  of  Albornoz  had  made  it  possible  for  Innocent  to 
contemplate  a  return  to  Rome,  upon  which  it  seems  that  he  had 
always  set  his  heart.  Further  ravages  of  the  freebooters  made  it 
urgent.  But  by  the  time  it  was  possible  Innocent  was  too  ill,  and 
his  death  in  1362  seemed  like  a  divine  dispensation  to  the 
Cardinals,  to  whom  Rome  was  a  nightmare. 

To  Urban  V.  (1362-1370)  belongs  the  honour  of  ending  the 
Babylonish  captivity.  In  character  he  was  saintly,  wise,  and 
only  just  short  of  heroic.  At  the  beginning  of  his  reign,  Petrarch 
wrote  to  him,  as  he  had  written  to  two  of  his  predecessors,  urging 
him  not  to  delay  any  longer.  His  appeal  shows  what  experience 
had  taught  him  of  the  Avignon  curia.  He  describes  the  beauties 
of  Italy,  the  excellencies  of  Italian  wine,  and  the  facilities  of 
the  journey  from  Avignon  to  Rome.  Only  in  ending  does  he 
appeal  to  the  Pope  personally,  with  confidence  in  his  moral 
vision — '-Wouldst  thou  rather  rise  at  the  last  day  among  the 
infamous  sinners  of  Avignon  than  between  Peter  and  Paul  ?  ". 

It  was  indeed  no  easy  task  which  lay  before  Urban,  and  only 
a  determined  man  could  have  carried  it  through.  But  there  were 
strong  political  motives  to  urge  him  forward,  as  well  as  the 
appeals  of  his  friend  Petrarch.  The  peril  of  the  mercenary  bands 
was  worse  than  ever ;  the  French  wars  had  made  France  as  dis- 
orderly as  Italy;  and  the  Black  Death  in  1361  had  ravaged 
Avignon  even  more  cruelly  than  elsewhere.  The  position  of  the 
Papacy  was  more  than  ever  anomalous  now  that  France  was 
weak,  and  the  conquests  of  Albornoz  had  at  least  made  Italy 
possible.  Leagues  for  the  protection  of  the  Pope  were  promised  by 
the  Italian  cities,  and  the  Emperor  was  eager  to  conduct  him 
back  in  person.  A  fleet  of  sixty  galleys  sent  by  Naples,  Venice, 
Genoa,  and  Pisa  promised  an  easy  journey.  Only  the  opposition 
of  the  Cardinals  stood  in  the  way.  The  three  Italians  among 
them  longed  for  Italy,  but  the  soft  Frenchmen  dreaded  the 
barbarism  of  Rome,  and  clung  to  their  fashionable  Avignon 
palaces.  The  seeds  of  the  great  schism  were  in  fact  already 
planted  in  the  College  of  Cardinals.  The  moral  courage  of 
Urban  was  strong  enough  to  prevail,  and  in  April,  1367,  the  fleet 
set  sail  "  like  a  floating  city  ". 

The  first  person  to  greet  the  Pope  when  he  landed  at  Corneto 
was  the  conqueror  Albornoz,  now  old  and  disillusioned  by  the 
ingratitude  of  the  Curia,  which  had  supplanted  him  as  legate  of 
the  papal  states,  though  he  was  still  the  directing  influence  in  the 
Italian  policy  of  the  Pope.     He  had  been  recalled  to  Avignon  in 


224    A  SHOKT  HISTOBY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

answer  to  charges  brought  against  him  in  connection  with 
Bologna,  but  Urban  showed  his  sympathy  with  his  brilHant  ser- 
vant in  a  beautiful  letter  of  consolation  in  which  he  ascribes  his 
misfortunes  to  the  envy  which  overtakes  all  great  men.  At 
Viterbo,  the  next  stopping-place  on  the  road  to  Rome,  the  death 
of  Albornoz  cast  a  shadow  across  the  progress  of  the  Pope.  The 
splendour  of  his  funeral  did  honour  to  the  greatest  of  cardinal- 
statesmen.  His  work  outlived  him,  and  his  code  of  laws  for  the 
patrimony,  known  as  the  ^Egidianse,  survived  until  the  nineteenth 
century.  Bologna  holds  a  memorial  to  him  in  the  College  for 
young  Spaniards  which  he  founded  there.  He  was  buried  as  he 
desired  at  Assisi,  whence  his  body  was  afterwards  taken  to  his 
native  land.  The  Pope  gave  the  jubilee  indulgence  to  the  coffin- 
bearers,  among  them  the  King  of  Castile,  who  carried  his  remains 
by  stages  to  Toledo. 

As  the  Pope  drew  near  to  Rome  his  progress  looked  more  and 
more  like  the  approach  of  a  conqueror.  His  military  escort 
increased,  and  a  rebellion  at  Viterbo  before  he  left  that  city,  had 
necessitated  special  precautions.  Rome  did  her  best  to  honour 
his  entry,  but  not  all  the  garlands  and  banners  could  disguise  the 
sinister  appearance  of  the  city.  The  churches  were  in  ruins,  the 
palaces  were  deserted,  and  stocks  of  rubbish  filled  the  squares. 
For  more  than  sixty  stormy  years  there  had  been  no  court  life, 
no  pilgrims  worth  mentioning,  no  great  religious  festivals,  none, 
in  fact,  of  the  ordinary  sources  of  Roman  prosperity.  The  nobles 
had  shunned  the  dismal  city,  the  mercenaries  had  sacked  it,  and 
even  the  priests  had  fled,  leaving  their  deserted  cloisters  to  add 
to  the  surrounding  desolation. 

It  needed  all  the  determination  of  Urban  to  face  the  com- 
plaints of  the  Cardinals  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  problems  of 
government  on  the  other.  Much  as  he  had  hated  the  luxury  of 
Avignon,  the  discomforts  of  the  dilapidated  Vatican  must  have 
told  severely  on  a  delicate  constitution.  Nevertheless  he  stayed 
in  Rome  for  three  years,  and  only  left  it  when  it  seemed  to  him 
really  expedient  to  go  back  to  France  in  order  to  promote  peace 
with  England.  His  three  years  were  crowded  with  the  work  of 
restoration.  During  the  first  winter  Rome  was  filled  with  masons, 
and  the  clerics  came  flocking  back.  In  the  spring  of  1368 
Charles  IV.  paid  his  promised  visit  to  the  Pope,  but  memorable 
as  the  occasion  was  on  which  "  the  two  swords  were  reconciled  " 
in  the  eyes  of  Christendom,  the  Emperor's  sojourn  was  not  an 
occasion  of  glory.  Charles  IV.  was  a  sensible,  commonplace  man, 
and  he  spent  most  of  his  energies  in  Italy  in  commuting  imperial 
claims  for  money.     He  went  back  to  Germany  rich  with  Italian 


WHEN  ISKAEL  CAME  OUT  OF  EGYPT  225 

gold,    but   despised   by   the   land   which    preferred   fantasy   to 
commonsense,  and  dreams  to  reality. 

In  the  following  year  another  and  apparently  greater  triumph 
fell  to  Urban  when  John  Palseologus,  the  Eastern  Emperor,  knelt 
before  him,  and  promised,  in  return  for  fighting-men  and  money, 
to  heal  the  schism  between  East  and  West.  Urban  knew  the 
circumstances  too  well  to  offer  more  than  sympathy,  but  there 
were  other  reasons  which  made  the  idea  of  a  crusade  against  the 
Turks  a  not  unwelcome  one  at  this  moment.  In  order  to  under- 
stand the  difficulties  which  Urban  had  to  face,  both  in  Avignon 
and  in  Italy,  it  is  necessary  to  realise  the  immense  power  of  the 
bands  of  mercenary  soldiers  which  appeared  in  Europe  in  the 
fourteenth  century.  Their  principal  fields  of  activity  were 
France  and  Italy — France  distracted  by  the  intermittent  wars 
with  England,  and  Italy  torn  asunder  with  the  rival  interests  of 
tyrants  and  communes.  These  "  errant  military  states,"  with 
their  splendid  generalship  and  organisation,  were  largely  com- 
posed of  "  the  proletariat  of  European  society  which  was  breaking 
out  of  its  ancient  grooves".  The  breakdown  of  chivalry  as  a 
social  force  had  let  loose,  on  the  one  hand,  classes  which  had 
hitherto  only  known  a  modified  freedom,  and  on  the  other  hand 
it  had  deprived  the  nations  of  their  standing  armies.  The  result 
was  that  Europe  was  practically  at  the  mercy  of  these  strong 
and  efficient  confederacies,  and  the  only  hope  of  peace  was  to 
play  off  one  against  the  other,  and  in  all  cases  to  pay  and  pay 
heavily.  The  answer  of  Landau  to  Albornoz  when  the  latter 
asked  him  to  respect  the  peace  of  the  states  of  the  Church  is 
typical — "  My  Lord,  our  manner  of  life  in  Italy  is  universally 
known.  To  rob,  plunder,  murder  those  who  resist,  is  our  custom. 
Our  revenues  depend  on  mortgages  in  the  provinces  which  we 
invade.  Those  who  value  their  lives  buy  peace  and  quiet  by 
heavy  tribute."  In  1364,  Urban  V.  appealed  to  the  Italian 
towns  to  combine  in  expelling  the  bands,  and  Albornoz  managed 
to  arrange  a  five  years'  truce  with  the  White  Company,  which 
was,  under  John  Hawkwood's  leadership,  the  most  formidable  of 
all.  But  neither  leagues  nor  truces  had  any  real  efi'ect.  The 
disunion  of  Italy  played  into  the  hands  of  the  condottieri,  whose 
interests  lay  in  promoting  jealousies  and  keeping  up  local 
vendetti.  When,  in  1365,  Charles  visited  Urban  at  Avignon,  the 
Emperor  and  the  Pope  formed  the  plan  of  using  the  mercenaries 
against  the  Turks.  But  the  captains  only  jeered,  knowing  that 
there  was  more  profit  in  the  plunder  of  Italy  than  in  the  East, 
which  had  been  pillaged  by  many  generations  of  crusaders. 
Urban'e  bulls  of  excommunication  against  the  bands  are  almost 
15 


226  A  SHOET  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

pathetic  in  their  inadequacy,  and  the  League  of  Italy  which  he 
formed  while  he  was  making  final  preparations  to  leave  Avignon 
fell  to  pieces  at  the  first  hint  of  internal  jealousy. 

It  was  probably  this  which  broke  the  spirit  of  Urbaii,  and  led 
him  to  leave  Rome  in  1370.  Another  reason  was  his  failure  to 
keep  his  hold  on  the  cities  which  Albornoz  had  won  back  to 
allegiance,  and  in  this  he  shows  traces  of  lingering  Franco- 
domination.  Places  had  to  be  found  for  his  French  followers, 
and  in  employing  them  as  local  governors  he  deserted  the 
traditions  of  Albornoz  and  loosened  the  bonds  with  municipal 
self-government  in  the  towns.  Urban's  departure  was  the  signal 
for  a  general  rising  against  the  French  Papacy,  and  the  con- 
sciousness of  failure  must  have  been  growing  on  him  for  some 
time.  St.  Bridget's  warning  of  death  when  he  left  Italy,  and  the 
sorrow  of  the  Roman  clergy,  who  genuinely  loved  him,  could  not 
avail  to  keep  him  when  the  troubles  of  France  called  him  back. 
His  farewell  speech  to  the  Romans,  in  which  he  thanks  them 
for  their  good  behaviour  while  he  lived  among  them,  shows  how 
little  a  Pope  might  expect  from  the  city  which  had  most  reason 
for  gratitude.  Two  months  after  his  return  to  Avignon  Urban 
V.  died  in  humility  in  his  brother's  house.  It  would  be  a  harsh 
world  which  would  echo  the  censure  of  Petrarch,  unblinded  by 
his  prejudice  and  assisted  by  historical  perspective:  "Pope 
Urban  would  have  been  numbered  among  the  most  honoured 
men,"  says  Petrarch,  "if,  when  dying,  his  litter  had  been  carried 
before  the  altar  of  St.  Peter,  and  if  with  tranquil  conscience  he 
had  there  fallen  asleep  in  death,  invoking  God  and  the  world  as 
witnesses  that  if  ever  any  Pope  forsook  this  place  the  fault  was 
not  his,  but  that  of  the  author  of  his  disgraceful  flight ". 


CHAPTER  XXI 
THE  SCHISM  AND  THE  COUNCILS,  a.d.  1370-1418 

IN  spite  of  all  his  efforts,  Urban  V.  had  done  little  more  than 
sow  the  wind.  His  learned  and  gentle  successor,  Gregory 
XI.  (1370-1378),  had  a  harder  task  than  ever  before  him,  for 
the  Cardinals  knew  from  experience  what  to  expect  in  Italy,  and 
the  Italian  cities  had  learnt  how  to  resist  the  French  Papacy. 
The  work  of  Albornoz  had  been  undone,  the  city  states  of  Italy  had 
entered  on  their  golden  age,  and  the  Papacy  stood  with  its  back 
to  the  dawn.  Florence,  in  her  proud  freedom,  deserted  her  Guelph 
traditions,  and  put  herself  at  the  head  of  a  League  of  Liberty 
against  the  Pope  and  his  foreign  governors.  Eighty  cities 
followed  the  red  banner  of  Florence,  inscribed  with  a  silver 
"Libertas";  Joanna  of  Naples  joined  the  national  movement, 
Bernabo  Visconti  made  himself  its  leader,  and  the  Pope's  own 
"Holy  Company"  under  Hawkwood  was  bought  over  for  13,000 
gold  florins.  Rome  stood  aloof  in  spite  of  blandishments,  for 
the  Romans  had  reason  to  know  that  Gregory  would  not  betray 
their  hopes  for  a  permanent  return  of  the  Curia.  In  the  first 
negotiations  between  Gregory  and  the  League,  Bologna  held  the 
scales.  Gregory,  anxious  to  keep  this  "jewel  in  the  papal 
crown,"  was  ready  to  make  reasonable  terms,  but  Florence  held 
out,  trusting  to  the  magic  of  the  word  "  liberty  "  to  work  its  way, 
even  in  the  Pope's  most  favoured  city.  The  Florentines  knew 
their  ground  :  Bologna  joined  the  league  in  March,  1376.  Never 
before  had  such  a  thunder-cloud  of  excommunication  broken  on 
a  rebel  people  as  that  in  which  the  mild  Gregory  condemned  the 
Florentines  to  be  the  slaves  of  every  Christian  nation  wherever 
they  might  be  found. 

Above  the  clamour  of  war  the  voice  of  Catherine  of  Siena 
was  heard  with  its  burden  of  peace.  St.  Catherine  was  much 
more  than  a  political  figure,  but  as  the  Joan  of  Arc  of  papal 
history  her  memory  was  reverenced  in  an  age  which  could  not 
have  done  justice  to  her  mystical  genius.  Her  letters  to  Gregory 
and  to  the  Florentines  are  fearless,  impartial,  and  ardent,  and  in 
both  cases  her  plea  is  for  peace  at  any  price,  even  the  price  of 

227 


228  A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

liberty  or  of  temporal  power.  She  implores  Gregory  to  return 
to  "  the  garden  watered  with  the  blood  of  martyrs,"  and  urges  him 
not  to  be  deterred  by  the  condition  of  Italy.  "  Do  not  let  your- 
self be  kept  by  what  has  come  to  pass  in  Bologna,  but  come.  I 
tell  you  that  ravening  wolves  will  lay  their  heads  in  your  lap 
like  gentle  lambs,  and  beseech  you  to  have  pity  on  them,  O 
Father."  The  maid  of  Siena  showed  more  than  paper  courage. 
In  the  same  year  she  went  as  the  envoy  of  Florence  to  visit 
Gregory  at  Avignon.  Her  interviews  with  the  Pope  astonished 
the  whole  court,  including  Gregory  himself,  who  heard  the 
Buffering  of  Italy  and  the  sins  of  the  clergy  laid  to  his  charge, 
and  his  own  faults,  more  particularly  his  nepotism,  sorrowfully 
deplored  by  the  intrepid  nun.  The  maid  of  Orleans  at  the  head 
of  her  forces  was  no  braver  than  the  Italian  girl  who  faced  the 
perils  of  Avignon  and  dared  the  anger  of  the  papal  court,  to  give 
peace  to  Italy  and  unity  to  the  world.  Catherine  was  fortunate 
in  the  character  of  the  man  whom  she  was  taking  to  task. 
Gregory  defended  her,  treated  her  with  honour,  and — urged,  it  is 
true,  by  other  considerations  as  well — yielded  to  her  persuasion 
and  allowed  her  to  accompany  him  back  to  Rome. 

The  journey  was  deplorable  enough.  Rough  weather,  the 
black  looks  of  the  Cardinals,  and  the  political  confusion  of  Italy 
would  have  deterred  a  less  resolute  man.  But  in  January,  1377, 
Gregory  entered  Rome  with  a  small  military  escort,  sheltered  by 
a  baldachino,  with  dancers  and  tumblers  in  front  of  him  and  as 
many  loyal  nobles  as  he  could  collect  at  his  back.  St.  Catherine 
had  desired  him  to  enter  alone,  accompanied  only  by  the 
crucifix  and  a  small  religious  procession,  but  the  fourteenth 
century  was  not  in  sympathy  with  her  ideal  of  religious 
simplicity.  The  news  which  reached  Gregory  in  Rome  was  not 
encouraging.  A  massacre  at  Cesena  strengthened  the  rebels, 
and  Florence  still  offered  the  most  unreasonable  terms.  But  an 
Italian  league  could  never  hold  together  for  very  long,  and  in 
the  course  of  a  few  months  there  were  signs  of  disruption. 
Bologna  was  one  of  the  first  to  buy  autonomy  at  the  price  of 
peace,  but  other  states  followed  its  example.  A  peace  congress 
at  Sarzana  was  proposed  at  last,  in  which  Bernabo  Visconti  was 
to  act  as  mediator  between  the  Pope  and  Florence.  But  before 
it  was  definitely  arranged  Gregory  XI.  was  taken  ill,  and  with 
failure  behind  him  and  tragedy  in  sight,  he  died  on  March  27, 
1378.  The  Papacy  had  worn  him  out,  for  he  died  an  old  man  at 
the  age  of  forty-seven. 

The  tragedy  which  Gregory  had  foreseen  was  that  of  the 
house  divided  against  itself.     Two  parties  had  for  a  long  time 


THE  SCHISM  AND  THE  COUNCILS  229 

existed  in  the  College  of  Cardinals,  the  French  and  the  Itahan. 
Hitherto  the  Italian  party  had  been  too  small  to  count  as  an 
opposition  in  times  of  election,  but  since  the  Popes  had  begun 
to  leave  Avignon  a  split  had  shown  itself  in  the  French  party. 
The  last  four  Popes  had  been  Limousins — natives,  that  is,  of 
the  part  of  France  round  about  Avignon.  There  is  a  racial 
difference  between  northern  and  southern  France,  and  this 
contributed  to  the  jealousy  which  sprang  up  between  the  Limou- 
sine Cardinals  and  the  so-called  Gallicans.  None  of  the  three 
parties  was  strong  enough  to  stand  alone,  and  therefore  a  man 
of  no  party  was  elected,  the  Neapolitan  Archbishop  of  Bari,  who 
took  the  name  of_  Urban  VI.  (1378-1389).  It  was  an  unfortunate 
choice  from  every  point  of  view,  for  it  pleased  no  one,  and  the 
new  Pope,  though  he  was  pious  and  austere,  had  a  temperament 
which  was  fatal  to  the  peace  of  Italy.  The  Romans  resented 
his  Neapolitan  origin,  and  a  riot  occurred  which  gave  rise  later 
to  the  theory  that  his  election  was  the  result  of  compulsion  and 
so  invalid. 

Urban  soon  showed  his  character,  and  hastened  the  catas- 
trophe which  had  for  so  long  been  imminent.  He  was  a  keen 
reformer  and  he  instantly  published  an  unmeasured  condemna- 
tion of  those  priests  who,  like  most  of  the  Cardinals,  held  several 
bishoprics  or  abbeys  and  served  none  of  them.  He  called  the 
priests  perjurors  who  came  to  do  him  homage,  because  they  had 
left  their  parishes  to  do  it.  He  told  one  Cardinal  he  was  a 
blockhead,  and  required  the  others  to  cease  their  foolish  chatter- 
ing. St.  Catherine,  who  was  not  afraid  of  a  little  violent  language, 
warned  him  that  "justice  without  mercy  will  be  injustice,"  and 
that  "  excess  destroys  rather  than  builds  up  ".  "  For  the  sake 
of  your  crucified  Lord,"  she  adds,  "  keep  these  hasty  movements 
of  yours  a  little  in  check  ".  By  August  the  endurance  of  the 
Cardinals  was  exhausted.  After  applying  for  leave  of  absence 
"for  reasons  of  health,"  and  failing  to  obtain  it,  the  French 
Cardinals  withdrew  to  Anagni.  What  had  finally  driven  them 
away  was  the  threat  of  Urban  that  he  was  going  to  create  a  large 
number  of  new  Italian  Cardinals  to  counteract  the  worldly  in- 
fluence of  the  French.  In  September,  1378,  they  announced  to 
the  world  that  the  true  Pope  was  Robert  of  Geneva,  henceforth 
Enown  as  Clement  VII. 

The  words  of  St.  Catherine  were  not  calculated  to  pour  oil  on 
the  waters  on  this  occasion :  "  I  have  learned  that  those  devils 
in  human  form  have  made  an  election,"  she  writes  to  Urban. 
"They  have  not  chosen  a  Vicar  of  Christ,  but  an  anti-Christ: 
never  will  I  cease  to  acknowledge  you,  my  dear  Father,  as  the 


230  A|SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

Representative  of  Christ  upon  earth.  Now  forward,  Holy 
Father :  go  without  fear  into  this  battle,  go  with  the  armour  of 
divine  love  to  cover  you,  for  that  is  your  defence."  It  was  the 
last  advice  which  it  was  necessary  to  give  to  such  a  man. 
Alberic  da  Barbiano  was  already  in  the  field  for  Urban,  and  by 
June,  1379,  Clement  VII.  found  that  Italy  was  no  longer  a 
possible  country  for  an  anti-pope,  and  was  obliged  to  escape  to 
Avignon.  Here  he  was  on  friendly  ground.  The  King  of 
France,  Charles  V.,  had  stood  at  the  back  of  the  rebel  Cardinals. 
He  had  naturally  regretted  the  departure  of  the  Popes  from 
Avignon,  and  he  had  much  to  fear  from  Urban's  zeal  for  reform. 
He  was,  therefore,  ready  to  finance  Clement  in  his  resistance  to 
Urban,  to  lend  him  the  Breton  band  of  mercenaries,  and  to  give 
him  and  his  Cardinals  the  protection  of  France.  In  return, 
Clement  granted  most  of  the  states  of  the  Church  to  Louis  of 
Anjou,  as  a  prospective  reward  for  the  expulsion  of  Urban.  The 
schism  was  an  accomplished  fact,  but  the  course  of  it  depended 
on  France.  "I  am  Pope,"  Charles  is  reported  to  have  said, 
when  he  heard  of  the  election  of  Urban,  and  Europe  endorsed 
his  opinion.  England  accordingly  declared  for  Urban,  and  so 
did  the  Emperor  Charles  IV.,  who  had  always  hated  the  Avignon 
Papacy.  Scotland  and  Spain  followed  the  lead  of  France ; 
Joanna  of  Naples  joined  Clement  owing  to  an  independent 
quarrel  with  Urban,  and  her  enemy,  the  King  of  Hungary, 
therefore  joined  the  rest  of  Italy  in  allegiance  to  the  Roman 
Pope. 

Urban  showed  no  wisdom  in  organising  his  forces.  He  chose 
to  centre  all  his  attention  on  Naples,  where  his  quarrel,  first  with 
Joanna  and  afterwards  with  Charles  of  Durazzo,  gave  him  a 
pretext  for  an  endeavour  to  acquire  a  Neapolitan  lordship  for 
his  worthless  nephew,  Butillo.  Urban  was  apt  to  concentrate 
with  dogged  futility  on  some  one  political  object  without  recog- 
nising failure  until  it  grew  into  catastrophe.  In  Naples,  his 
humiliations  came  thick  and  fast.  His  Cardinals  intrigued 
against  him,  provoked  by  the  discomforts  of  life  in  a  whirlwind 
court,  and  by  the  disastrous  selfishness  of  Urban's  schemes. 
He  was  besieged  in  Nocera,  and  treated  by  his  enemies  with 
open  contempt.  He  could  only  retaliate  by  excommunicating 
the  besieging  army  with  great  ceremony  at  his  window  four 
times  a  day.  When  finally  he  escaped,  he  was  a  homeless 
wanderer  in  Italy,  with  a  few  supporters  to  whom  he  was 
stupidly  ungrateful,  and  six  captive  Cardinals,  whose  sufiferings 
aroused  sympathy  with  their  conspiracy  and  hostility  against 
the  vindictive  Pope. 


THE  SCHISM  AND  THE  COUNCILS  231 

Urban  was  not  a  welcome  guest  in  the  towns  which  he  pro- 
posed to  honour.  Genoa  was  not  very  respectful,  and  Florence 
refused  to  receive  him  at  all.  Perugia  could  not  keep  him  out, 
but  the  love  adventures  of  Butillo  caused  a  riot  which  hastened 
their  departure.  Rome  was  in  the  throes  of  municipal  rebellion, 
but  he  was  driven  by  sheer  poverty  and  lack  of  support  to  take 
refuge  there  on  his  way  back  to  Naples  in  1389.  Here  he  died, 
deserted  and  unregretted  by  the  friends  who  had  rallied  round 
him  in  the  first  crises  of  his  reign.  The  schism  may  have  been 
inevitable  from  the  time  when  the  Popes  first  left  Avignon,  but 
Urban  had  driven  a  wedge  into  the  rift  by  his  exuberant  un- 
wisdom. His  pontificate  is  an  example  of  the  danger  of  electing 
a  Pope  untried  in  greatness:  as  a  non-party  Archbishop  he 
had  had  very  little  influence,  and  when  he  was  made  Pope  he 
meant  to  have  his  fling.  Many  other  Popes  were  like  him  in 
this,  but  the  real  trouble  was  that  his  aims  were  unworthy,  and 
he  was  too  honest  to  disguise  them. 

Urban  had  created  twenty-nine  Italian  Cardinals  to  fill  the 
places  of  those  who  had  deserted  to  Clement.  Of  these  fourteen 
were  in  Rome  at  the  time  of  his  death.  They  met  in  conclave 
and  elected  Boniface  IX.  (1389-1404)  who  was  first  and  foremost 
a  man  of  peace,  of  afi'able  ways,  and  a  thorough  Italian.  The 
chroniclers  consider  it  remarkable  that  no  charge  of  unchastity 
was  ever  brouiiht  against  him.  "Though  he  was  not  above 
thirty  years  old  when  he  entered  upon  the  Popedom,  yet  he 
lived  so  strictly  at  that  florid  age  and  in  those  wicked  times 
that  no  act  of  lust  or  inordinate  pleasure  could  be  charged  upon 
him;  for  he  seemed  to  have  changed  his  youth  into  age" 
(Platina). 

Meanwhile  Clement  VII.  was  not  as  strong  as  the  antagonist 
of  Urban  VI.  should  have  been.  The  desertions  from  Urban's 
camp  were  chiefly  personal,  and  the  distribution  of  nations 
remained  as  it  was  in  the  beginning.  Clement's  chief  asset  was 
the  allegiance  of  Spain,  which  had  been  procured  by  his  ablest 
supporter,  Peter  de  Lana.  On  the  other  hand,  there  had  been 
signs  since  1380  of  a  tendency  to  weaken  the  loyalty  of  France. 
The  death  of  Charles  V.  in  1380  had  removed  his  strongest 
supporter.  The  failure  of  the  French  in  Naples  was  a  severe 
blow,  and  the  money  diflBculty  in  France  was  very  acute.  But 
more  serious  still  was  the  attitude  of  the  University  of  Paris — 
that  strong  body  of  educated  opinion  which  formed  the  ideas  of 
Europe.  The  University  had  taken  the  troubles  of  Christendom 
profoundly  to  heart,  and  it  showed  a  disconcerting  disposition 
to   ignore   the  political  issues  inherent  in  the  schism,  and  to 


232  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

concentrate  on  the  moral  necessity  for  peace.  In  1381,  Pierre 
D'Ailly,  the  spokesman  of  the  University,  had  suggested  three 
ways  of  ending  the  schism,  by  cession,  by  compromise,  or  by 
General  Council.  In  the  same  year  Langenetur,  a  German 
doctor  of  Paris,  wrote  a  defence  of  the  principle  of  a  General 
Council,  which  henceforth  became  the  ruling  idea  of  University 
policy.  France  on  the  whole  followed  the  University,  and  its 
support  of  the  Avignon  Papacy  was  henceforth  intermittent  and 
unreliable.  The  madness  of  Charles  VI.  made  Clement's  position 
still  more  unstable,  and  his  attempts  to  bribe  the  Court  party  as 
against  the  University  did  not  increase  his  popularity  in  Paris. 
The  truth  was  that  Clement  was  too  sensitive  for  an  anti-pope  : 
he  could  neither  get  on  with  nor  without  France,  and  while  he 
resented  his  dependence  he  could  not  make  good  his  emancipa- 
tion, 

Boniface  IX.  was  more  successful  than  Clement,  because  his 
aims  were  definite,  consistent,  and  limited.  He  wanted  to 
restore  the  papal  monarchy  in  Italy,  and  he  wanted  as  much 
money  as  he  could  get.  If  "  money  was  the  origin  of  the 
schism "  as  contemporary  chroniclers  insist,  it  was  also  the 
chief  difficulty  of  the  schismatic  popes,  for  the  papal  revenues 
which  had  been  found  insufficient  for  one  Pope,  now  had  to  pro- 
vide for  two,  and  that  in  the  teeth  of  the  storm  which  had 
already  gathered  against  papal  exactions.  Boniface  showed  the 
genius  of  an  auctioneer  in  the  sale  of  offices,  and  the  wisdom  of  an 
extortioner  in  commuting  advantages  into  money.  He  sold  not 
only  the  offices  themselves,  but  "  preferences  "  to  the  offices,  and 
if  there  were  bidders  enough,  "  pre-preferences  ".  He  sold  the 
titles  of  papal  Vicars  to  the  nobles  who  had  seized  lordships  in 
the  Papal  States,  and  renewed  them  for  further  payments  after 
ten  years.  This  was  an  ingenious  plan,  because,  while  it 
sanctioned  the  fact,  which  could  not  be  disputed,  it  reserved  a 
certain  discretionary  authority  for  the  Pope  to  use  in  the  future. 
Its  disadvantages  would  not  be  felt  until  time  had  neutralised 
the  Pope's  influence,  and  until  such  great  names  as  Malatesta  of 
Rimini  and  Este  of  Ferrara  had  eclipsed  the  shadowy  claim  of 
ecclesiastical  overlordship. 

Like  his  predecessor,  Boniface  IX.  founded  his  Italian  policy 
on  Naples.  He  allied  himself  with  Ladislas,  the  young  son  of 
Charles,  and  reaped  the  advantages  of  that  prince's  energy  and 
success.  But  it  was  always  dangerous  for  a  Pope  to  commend 
the  fortunes  of  the  Papacy  to  youth  and  ambition,  and  the 
career  of  Ladislas  is  no  exception  to  this  rule.  While  Ladislas 
was  making  good  his  position  in  Naples,  sanctioned  and  helped 


THE  SCHISM  AND  THE  COUNCILS  233 

by  the  alliance  of  the  Papacy,  Boniface  was  struggling  with  the 
nobles  of  the  Campagna,  and  collecting  lands  and  titles  for  his 
relations.  In  1393  he  was  driven  from  Rome  through  the  un- 
popularity caused  by  his  financial  exactions,  but  Ladislas  came 
to  the  rescue  and  enabled  him  to  return  on  the  most  favourable 
terms.  A  second  rising  was  put  down  by  Ladislas  a  few  years 
later,  and  in  1398  the  mere  rumour  of  his  approach  was  enough 
to  subdue  the  rebel  Count  of  Fondi  and  the  more  formidable 
Count  Vico  of  Viterbo,  and  to  win  from  the  Romans  the  sacrifice 
of  their  civic  liberty.  Ladislas  was  running  up  a  long  account 
against  Boniface,  which  the  future  would  have  to  pay. 

The  movement  in  favour  of  unity  threatened  Boniface  just 
as  severely  as  his  rival.  In  1394,  the  University  of  Paris  was 
pressing  a  scheme  for  the  withdrawal  of  allegiance  from  both 
Popes,  and  Boniface  felt  it  expedient  to  give  his  approval, 
knowing  that  Clement  would  oppose  it,  and  hoping  to  win  favour 
in  France  by  his  show  of  humility.  But  the  death  of  Clement — 
the  'opportunist  who  lived  by  compromises  " — seemed  to  pro- 
vide an  easier  way.  Union  did,  indeed,  appear  to  be  in  sight. 
"  It  was  as  though  the  Holy  Ghost  stood  at  the  door  and 
knocked."  But  the  French  Cardinals,  unwilling  to  do  all  the 
surrendering,  elected  Peter  de  Luna  as  Benedict  XIII.  on  the 
express  understanding  that  he  should  a^icate  as  soon  as  he 
was  required  to  do  so.  Instead  of  carrying  out  his  promise,  he 
clung  with  amazing  tenacity  to  his  unenviable  office,  survived 
five  rival  Popes,  and  died  after  thirty  years  of  futile  self-assertion. 
The  immediate  situation  created  by  his  election  was  a  deadlock. 
Neither  Pope  would  move  without  the  other,  and  both  were 
content  to  carry  on  a  war  of  excommunication.  Benedict  XIII. 
showed  a  surprising  power  of  winning  over  the  best  of  his 
opponents:  he  seems  to  have  had  a  scholar's  attraction  for 
scholars,  and  even  D'Ailly,  the  apostle  of  unity,  accepted  a 
bishopric  from  »him  in  1395.  But  the  unity  movement  had 
spread  from  Paris  throughout  Europe,  and  in  1397  embassies 
from  England,  France,  and  Castile  were  sent  to  Rome  and 
Avignon  to  require  the  Popes  to  heal  the  schism  before  1398. 
In  1398,  Charles  of  France  met  Wenzel,  King  of  Germany,  at 
Rheims,  and  each  undertook  to  make  his  own  Pope  resign.  This 
was  followed  by  the  withdrawal  of  the  allegiance  of  France  from 
Benedict,  and  the  siege  of  Avignon  from  September  to  April. 
Wenzel  meanwhile  insisted  that  Charles  must  act  first — "  W£en 
he  has  deposed  his  Pope,  we  will  depose  ours  ".  The  truth  was 
that  both  Kings  had  promised  more  than  they  could  fulfil. 
France  was  being  torn  by  civil  war,  and  the  successes  of  the 


234  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

Orleanists  had  brought  a  reaction  in  favour  of  Benedict  XIII., 
who  was  now  released  from  Avignon,  and  successfully  at  work 
winning  over  the  Burgundian  faction.  Boniface  was  playing 
much  the  same  game  in  Germany.  He  was  supporting  Rupert 
against  Wenzel,  and  in  Hungary  he  championed  the  claims  of 
Ladislas  against  Wenzel's  brother,  Sigismund.  Envoys  passed 
between  the  rival  Popes,  but  to  no  purpose :  neither  of  them 
really  wanted  unity,  for  each  in  his  own  way  found  the  schism 
a  success. 

When  the  envoys  of  Benedict  reached  Rome  they  found 
Boniface  ill  and  in  great  pain,  and  in  October,  1404,  he  died. 
His  last  reported  words  were :  "  If  I  had  more  money,  I  should 
be  well  enough  ".  The  Roman  Cardinals  followed  the  example 
of  Avignon  in  the  next  election,  and  each  promised  to  resign  if 
elected.  As  at  Avignon  the  promise  was  broken  by  the  new 
Pope,  Innocent  VII.  (1404-1406),  an  old  and  blameless  Neapolitan, 
who  owed  his  election  to  the  certainty  that  he  would  not  live 
very  long.  In  his  two  years'  pontificate  he  reaped  the  un- 
fortunate results  of  his  predecessor's  dealings  with  Ladislas. 
Innocent  was  too  old  to  hold  his  own  against  the  strong  forces 
of  young  Italy,  and  from  the  first  the  King  of  Naples  made  him 
his  tool.  Ladislas  made  an  agreement  with  the  Romans  which 
left  him  the  arbiter  in  all  their  quarrels  with  the  Papacy.  The 
next  step  was,  of  course,  to  stir  them  up  to  revolt,  and  so  to 
weaken  both  sides  that  Rome  should  fall  an  easy  prey  to  Naples. 
Innocent  was  at  first  popular  in  Rome,  but  the  wiles  of  Ladislas 
and  the  importunities  of  his  own  relations  soon  turned  the  tide. 
When  the  Romans  found  that  Ladislas  was  ready  to  support 
them,  they  turned  on  Innocent  and  wrung  concessions  from  him 
till  he  had  no  more  to  yield.  "  I  have  given  you  all  you  wished," 
he  said;  "what  more  can  I  give  you  except  this  mantle?"  In 
a  dispute  concerning  the  custody  of  the  bridges,  his  nephew 
killed  eleven  citizens  who  were  under  the  Pope's  protection. 
The  riot  which  followed  obliged  Innocent  to  escape  to  Viterbo, 
while  the  Colonna  seized  the  Vatican,  and  Ladislas  occupied  the 
city.  In  January,  1406,  the  Romans  implored  him  to  return, 
and  after  a  few  months  of  peace,  he  died.  Nothing  had  been 
done  for  the  cause  of  unity  but  a  few  futile  negotiations  between 
Innocent  and  Benedict  XIII. ,  the  latter  having  fled  to  Genoa 
owing  to  a  revulsion  of  feeling  in  France. 

Encouraged  by  the  death  of  Innocent  the  Roman  Cardinals 
elected  another  old  Pope  in  November,  1406.  Gregory  XII. 
(1406-1417)  was  eighty  years  of  age,  and  all  his  life  he  had  been 
renowned  for  his  sincerity.     He  was  known  to  care  for  nothing 


THE  SCHISM  AND  THE  COUNCILS  235 

but  unity,  and  in  his  first  sermon  as  Pope  he  gave  out  as  his 
text:  "Prepare  ye  the  way  of  the  Lord".  He  had,  of  course, 
undertaken  to  resign  at  once,  and  there  is  every  reason  to  think 
that  he  meant  to  keep  his  word.  But  he  was  torn  between 
Ladislas  and  his  relations,  and  led  by  them  into  uncongenial 
duplicities.  In  his  first  negotiations  with  Benedict  neither  side 
was  sincere,  and  a  meeting  was  appointed  at  Savona  which 
neither  Pope  meant  to  attend.  Gregory's  nephew,  Antonio 
Correr,  was  his  spokesman,  and  also  it  seems  his  master.  In 
May,  1407,  the  envoys  of  France,  Pierre  D'Ailly  among  them, 
approached  each  Pope  in  turn  ;  the  interviews  were  characteristic 
of  the  two  men.  Benedict  answered  the  questions  put  to  him  so 
fast  and  so  fluently  that  no  one  understood  what  he  said,  and 
every  one  relied  on  his  neighbour's  intelligence  to  exceed  his  own. 
When  the  general  haziness  was  discovered,  they  asked  in  plain 
language  for  a  Bull  containing  a  promise  to  abdicate  at  Savona. 
Benedict  put  them  ofl"  once  more,  this  time  with  an  emotional 
appeal  for  confidence  and  a  gentle  remonstrance  for  their  want 
of  faith  which  reduced  the  envoys  to  tears,  and  sent  them  back 
to  Paris  forgiven  and  deceived. 

Gregory  was  completely  in  the  hands  of  his  relations,  who 
spent  his  money  and  alienated  his  supporters,  while  round  him 
whirled  intrigues  of  all  kinds  to  prevent  his  resignation.  The 
envoys  could  make  nothing  of  him.  He  disavowed  his  nephew's 
undertaking  that  he  should  go  to  Savona ;  he  did  not  see  how 
he  was  to  go ;  he  could  not  afi"ord  the  galleys ;  he  did  not  like 
the  treaty  ;  he  could  not  leave  Rome  while  Ladislas  was  so 
near.  The  inexorable  D'Ailly  answered  his  excuses  point  by 
point,  and  finally  reduced  him  to  tears.  It  seems  as  if  at  the 
back  of  his  reluctance  was  the  fear  of  his  own  family.  "  Oh,  I 
will  give  you  union,  do  not  doubt  it,"  he  cried,  pathetically  dis- 
traught ;  "  and  I  will  satisfy  your  King,  but  I  pray  you  do  not 
leave  me,  and  let  some  of  your  number  accompany  me  on  my 
way  and  comfort  me." 

The  time  for  the  meeting  drew  near,  and  Gregory  was  said  to 
be  on  his  way  to  Savona.  A  letter  from  Benedict  reached  him 
on  his  journey.  "We  are  both  old  men,"  wrote  Benedict,  "God 
has  given  us  a  great  opportunity ;  let  us  accept  it  when  ofi"ered 
before  we  die."  But  Gregory's  journey  proved  to  be  merely  a 
tour  for  the  aggrandisement  of  his  nephews,  and  bad  news  from 
Rome  was  a  pretext  for  saving  him  from  "the  damnable  and 
diabohcal  suggestion"  of  abdication.  There  was  really  some 
excuse  for  Gregory :  Ladislas  was  financing  rebellion  in  Rome, 
and  Benedict  XIII.  was  found  to  be  intriguing  behind  his  back. 


236 


A  SHOBT  HISTOBY  OF  THE  PAPACY 


But  the  patience  of  Christendom  was  exhausted,  and  drastic 
measures  were  in  preparation  against  both  him  and  his  rival. 
Eight  Cardinals  met  together  at  Livorno,  four  from  each  Curia, 
to  discuss  plans  for  a  General  Council.     All  Gregory's  Cardinals 
had  deserted  him   except  one,  and  the  strongest  man  of  his 
party,  Baldassare  Cossa,  legate  of  Bologna,  was  raising  troops 
against  him.     Benedict  was  equally  defenceless,  for  France  had 
threatened   to   withdraw   obedience   and    had    already   cut   off 
supplies.     The  Council  of  Pisa  was  announced  by  the  Cardinals 
for  May  29,  1409.     Their  action  was  of  course  a  revolution,  but 
it  was  sanctioned  by  necessity,  and  Europe  readily  acquiesced. 
Gregory  and  Benedict  were  both  equally  discredited,  for  both 
had  shown  a  deplorable  lack  of  public  spirit.     But  neither  was 
without  his  supporters,  even  at  this  crisis.     Gregory  was  out  of 
his  element  in  politics,  but  he  was  a  good  man  in  private  life, 
and  it  is  impossible  not  to  be  sorry  for  him.     "  I  followed  the 
Pope  from  Lucca  rather  through  affection  than  because  I  ap- 
prove his  course,"  said  Leo  Bruni.     Benedict's  defects,  on  the 
other  hand,  lay  in  the  quality  of  his  mind,  which  was  hard  and 
legal,  and  he  did  not  know  how  to  present  his  case  to  those  who 
were  different  from  himself. 

The  attitude  of  the  Council  of  Pisa  towards  both  Popes  was 
summary  and  uncompromising.     On  their  failure  to  appear  in 
answer  to  summons,  they  were  both  pronounced  contumacious, 
and  after  two  months'  delay  a  decree  of  deposition  was  issued 
against  them.     The  Cardinals'  call  to  arms  had  met  a  ready 
response  from  the  national  churches,  and  yet  the  assembly  at 
Pisa,  in  spite  of  its  numerical  strength,  was  obviously  not  sure 
of  itself.     D'Ailly  and  Gerson  laboured  feverishly  to  establish  a 
legal  basis  for  the  act  of  revolution :  the  law  of  nature,  the  usage 
of  primitive  Christianity,  and  the  authority  of  Scripture  were 
brought  forward  to  justify  the  Cardinals'  emergency  measure, 
and  the  proceedings  were  carried  out  with  a  combination  of 
haste  and  intellectual  violence  which  almost  suggests  apology. 
The  Council  was  not  unanimous,  and  yet  the  opposition  remained 
unheard.     The  envoys  of  Rupert,   King  of  the  Romans,  were 
excluded,  and  Carlo  Malatesta,  who  refused  to  break  faith  with 
Gregory,  could  not  get  a  hearing.     The  embassy  of  Benedict  XIIL 
was  not   even    received.      The   assembly   was   almost   entirely 
ecclesiastical ;  it  was  obviously  uncomfortable  in  rebellion,  and 
the  plea  of  emergency  gave  it  no  relief.     The  decree  of  deposi- 
tion did  not  end  the  schism,  because  each  of  the  Popes  retained 
some  of  his  followers  who  were  unwilling  to  abide  by  the  con- 
ciliar  decision.     In  June,  1409,  when  there  were  still  two  Popes 


THE  SCHISM  AND  THE  COUNCILS  237 

in  Christendom,  the  Council  of  Pisa  proceeded  to  elect  a  third. 
For  this  reason  it  is  said  to  have  failed;  it  did  not  end  the 
schism,  and  it  carried  through  no  reform ;  it  did,  however,  eflfect 
a  more  momentous  achievement  in  paving  the  way  for  the 
reformation. 

The  Council's  Pope,  Alexander  V.  (1409-1410),  lived  only  ten 
months;  unable  to  entefTxtmio.  which  was  held  by  Ladislas  in 
the  name  of  Gregory,  he  died  at  Bologna,  under  the  shadow  of 
Baldassare  Cossa.  Alexander  was  a  Greek  theologian,  whose 
heart  was  bound  up  with  the  Franciscans.  The  contest  between 
the  friars  and  the  parochial  clergy,  of  which  Chaucer  gives  so 
clear  a  picture,  was  then  at  its  height.  The  unworldly  Alex- 
ander's one  important  measure  was  a  Bull  in  favour  of  his  beloved 
order  of  such  extravagant  beneficence  that  the  Franciscans 
themselves  had  to  refute  it  in  self-defence. 

The  inevitable  successor  of  Alexander  was  the  man  who  had 
really  carried  through  the  Council  of  Pisa.     Baldassare  Cossa, 
who  took  the  name  of  John  XXIII.  (1410-1415),  cannot  fairly  be 
judged  by  ordinary  ecclesiastical  standards.     He  was  first  and 
foremost  an  able  condottiere,  who  as  legate  had  made  himself 
lord  of  Bologna,  and  ruled  it  with  firmness  and  care.     He  had 
risen  through  his  success  as  an  extortioner  for  Boniface  IX.,  and 
his  extraordinary  efiiciency  in  profit-making  showed  itself  as 
much  in  politics  as  in  finance.     The  first  problem  which  con- 
fronted him  as  Pope  was  the  schism  which  had  infected  the 
Empire.     Of  the  three  candidates  to  the  Empire,  John  chose  to 
ally  himself  with  the  Sigismund  of  Bohemia,  whose  allegiance 
was  to  cost  him  dear.     The  immediate  result,  however,  was  to 
give  him  the  support  of  Germany,  and,  encouraged  by  this,  he 
set  out  for  Rome  to  fight  Ladislas  in  the  name  of  Louis  of  Anjou. 
But  after  the  one  victory  of  Rocca  Secca,  the  fortunes  of  John 
and  his  ally  deserted  them.     Louis  proved  to  be  useless,  and  their 
best  general,  the  famous  Sforza,  deserted  to  Ladislas.     After  con- 
soling himself  with  burning  Sforza  in  eSigy  and  indulging  in  a 
few  coarse  jokes  at  his  expense,  John  made  peace  with  Ladislas 
in  terms  which  are  characteristic  of  Italian  warfare  at  this  period. 
Both  sides  threw  over  their  allies,  and  neither  meant  to  keep 
faith  with  the  other  when  they  were  disarmed. 

Meanwhile,  John  found  himself  obliged  to  take  steps  towards 
summoning  a  Council  for  the  reform  of  ecclesiastical  abuses, 
which  had  been  enjoined  by  the  Council  of  Pisa.  If  reform  had 
been  difficult  to  carry  through  when  there  were  two  Popes,  it  was 
harder  still  with  three,  and  John  had  no  intention  of  modifying 
or  abolishing  any  profitable  abuses  which  helped  him  to  pay  his 


238  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

way.  Nor  was  his  character  unknown,  for,  in  answer  to  his  sum- 
mons for  a  Council  in  Rome  in  February,  1413,  only  a  few  clergy 
arrived,  and  their  serious  business  merely  consisted  in  burning 
the  books  of  John  Wyclif  on  the  steps  of  St.  Peter's. ' 

Soon  after  the  Council,  John  had  to  take  refuge  in  Florence 
while  Ladislas  occupied  Rome.  While  he  was  there  he  opened 
negotiations  with  Sigismund,  who  was  anxious  to  carry  his  im- 
perial claims  to  Italy  in  the  time-honoured  imperial  manner. 
As  a  preliminary  he  suggested  another  General  Council,  and  he 
made  this  a  condition  of  his  alliance  with  John  XXIII.  The 
thought  of  Ladislas  and  his  soldiers  in  Rome  led  John  to  agree, 
and  his  envoys  set  out  to  discuss  the  place  and  conditions  for 
the  assembly  of  the  Council.  Sigismund  proposed  the  town  of 
Constance,  and.  in  the  face  of  the  Pope's  expostulations,  he  re- 
mained surprisingly  obdurate.  John  knew  the  importance  of 
meeting  the  Council  on  his  own  territory,  but  in  the  end  he  was 
obliged  to  submit.  All  he  could  do  was  to  safeguard  his  personal 
freedom,  and  to  ally  himself  with  Frederick  of  Austria,  whose 
territory  dominated  the  "  trap  for  foxes,"  as  John  gloomily  named 
the  Council  meeting-place. 

The  Council  of  Constance  had  an  ambitious  programme.    Its 
aim  was  "  to  restore  the  unity  of  the  Church ;  to  reform  it  in 
head  and  members;  and  to  purge  it  of  erroneous  doctrine".     It 
is  unnecessary  here  to  describe  the  immorality  and  worldliness 
of  the  clerical  standard  in  the  fifteenth  century,  for  all  con- 
temporary literature  bears  witness  to  it.     It  was  natural  that 
the  doctrine  which  enabled  such  conditions  to  survive  should 
be  called  in  question  as  well  as  the  conduct  for  which  it  was  un- 
justly made  responsible.     The  Council  of  Constance  was  a  real 
congress  of  Europe,  and   not,  like   Pisa,  a  glorified   synod  of 
ecclesiastics.    At  Constance,  therefore,  there  was  less  unanimity 
of  purpose,  and  a  greater  complexity  of  motives.    The  University 
of  Paris,  which  had  been  so  active  in  introducing  the  conciliar 
movement,  now  wanted  merely  to  restore  and  purify  the  Papacy, 
which  schism  had  degraded.     Some  German  reformers,  of  whom 
Dietrich  of  Niem  is  typical,  wanted  to  go  further  and  limit  the 
papal  power,  while  John  Huss  and   his  Bohemian  supporters 
demanded  a  root-and-branch  reform  of  the  entire  papal  system. 
With  regard  to  unity,  John  XXIII.  protested  with  some  reason 
that  Pisa  had  settled  the  question  already,  but  the  wiser  counsel 
of  D'Ailly,  that  Benedict  and  Gregory  should  be  gently  treated, 
ultimately  prevailed. 

With  the  arrival  of  Sigismund  in  December,  1414,  the  Council 
opened  in  the  full  splendour  of  the  pageantry  in  which  he  de- 


THE  SCHTRM  AND  THE  COUNCILS  239 

lighted.    Between  50,000  and  100,000  strangers  came  to  the  little 

Swiss  town,  and  among  them  fifteen  hundred  prostitutes  and  four- 
teen  hundred  minstrels  and  mountebanks.  Business  opened  with 
a  crushing  blow  for  John  XXIII.  A  proposal  was  made  that  all 
the  three  Popes  should  abdicate  at  once.  It  was  avowedly  hard 
on  John,  but  he  would  not  refuse  "since  the  Good  Shepherd 
would  lay  down  his  life  for  the  sheep  ".  That,  however,  was  not 
John's  conception  of  the  pastoral  office.  His  acquiescence  was 
due  to  his  confidence  in  the  Italian  majority  to  vote  solidly  in 
his  favour.  Bishop  Hallam  of  Salisbury  cut  away  the  ground 
under  his  feet  by  proposing  that  each  nation  should  vote 
separately,  irrespective  of  its  numerical  strength.  The  proposal 
was  fatal  both  to  John  and  to  the  Council,  as  after  events  were 
to  show.  A  Bull  was  wrung  from  the  reluctant  Pope,  after  two 
formula  had  been  rejected  as  insufficiently  binding,  and  John 
made  a  last  desperate  and  fruitless  attempt  to  bribe  Sigismund 
with  the  gift  of  the  Golden  Rose— the  highest  compliment  which 
could  pass  between  a  Pope  and  his  royal  sons.  When,  however, 
Sigismund  began  to  talk  about  a  new  election.  John  felt  that 
it  was  time  to  act.  With  the  help  of  his  friend  Frederick  of 
Austria,  he  escaped  from  the  foxes'  trap,  and  took  refuge  under 
Frederick's  protection  at  SchaflThausen.  Frederick  meanwhile 
was  entertaining  the  Council  at  a  tourney,  while  John  passed 
through  the  gates  disguised  as  a  groom.  His  excuse  was  that 
his  life  was  in  danger  in  Constance,  both  from  ill-health  and 
from  his  enemies.  "  By  the  grace  of  God  we  are  free,"  he  wrote 
to  Sigismund,  "and  in  agreeable  atmosphere  at  Schafiliausen, 
where  we  came  unknown  to  our  son  Frederick  of  Austria,  and 
with  no  intention  of  going  back  upon  our  promise  of  abdicating 
to  promote  the  peace  of  the  Church,  but  that  we  may  carry  it 
out  in  freedom  and  with  regard  to  our  health  ". 

His  flight  left  the  Cardinals  in  a  dilemma.  They  must  either 
obey  the  summons  of  the  Pope  and  share  his  inevitable  fall,  or 
they  must  remain  with  the  Council  and  bear  the  brunt  of  its 
displeasure.  It  had  by  now  become  their  settled  policy  to 
defend  the  theoretical  position  of  the  Papacy  and  ward  off  all 
dangerous  efi'orts  towards  reform.  Even  D'Ailly,  since  John  had 
made  him  a  Cardinal,  saw  the  situation  from  the  angle  of  the 
Curia;  the  Cardinals  must  stand  or  fall  with  the  Papacy  and 
the  claims  of  the  Council,  soaring  daily  higher,  must  be  some- 
how held  in  check.  It  was  not  loyalty  to  John,  but  to  the 
principle  of  the  Papacy,  which  threw  the  Cardinals  into 
opposition,  and  they  made  no  attempt  to  defend  the  Pope 
against  the  charges  brought  against  his  character  in  the  decree 


240  A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

of  deposition  which  denounced  him  as  "unworthy,  useless,  and 
harmful". 

John  himself  did  not  attempt  to  answer  the  fifty-four  charges 
of  the  Council,  because  he  knew  that  they  were  unanswerable. 
He  offered  no  defence,  and  tried  only  to  avoid  a  public  humilia- 
tion. His  accusers  ranged  over  his  life  and  unearthed  the  sins 
of  his  youth  and  the  crimes  of  his  manhood.  They  applied  to 
him  a  standard  to  which  he  would  never  have  pretended  to 
aspire,  and  condemned  him  for  conduct  characteristic  of  the 
life  of  the  freebooters'  camp,  to  which  he  properly  belonged. 
Among  other  accusations  we  find,  "  Item  quod  Dominus  Joannes 
Papa  cum  uxore  patris  sui  et  cum  Sanctis  monialibus  incestum, 
cum  virginibus  stuprum,  et  cum  conjugatis  adulter ium  et  alia 
incontinential  crimina  .  .  .  commisit".  (Von  de  Hardt.  See 
Creighton,  vol.  i.,  p.  341.)  John's  real  mistake  was  in  allowing 
himself  to  be  made  Pope.  He  had  been  a  successful  soldier  of 
fortune,  but  he  was  ludicrously  out  of  place  among  theologians 
and  moral  reformers.  After  his  deposition  on  May  29,  1415,  he 
was  kept  in  custody  till  the  dissolution  of  the  Council,  at  the 
Castle  of  Heidelberg.  In  1419,  however,  he  escaped  and  found 
a  shelter  in  the  household  of  his  friend,  Cosimo  de  Medici.  His 
last  humiliation  occurred  when  he  prostrated  himself  before 
his  successor,  and  won  from  him  grace  to  retain  the  cardinalian 
purple.  The  Florentines  had  shown  him  respectful  sympathy, 
and  when  he  died,  a  few  months  later,  they  buried  him  in  their 
beautiful  Baptistery.  In  spite  of  Martin  V.'s  objection,  Cosimo 
gave  him  a  pontifical  tomb,  the  work  of  Donatello  and  Michel- 
ozzo,  inscribed  with  the  words  "quondam  papa". 

With  the  deposition  of  John'XXlIL,  one  of  the  aims  of  the 
Council  was  attained.  The  schism  was  practically  over,  for  the 
rival  Popes,  Gregory  and  Benedict,  were  powerless  in  the  face  of 
the  unanimity  of  the  Council.  The  Cardinals  were  successful  in 
postponing  the  question  of  constitutional  reform  by  directing 
the  zeal  of  the  Council  to  an  attack  on  heresy.  The  trial  and 
execution  of  John  Huss,  the  proto-martyr  of  Protestantism,  is  a 
stain  on  the  spiritual  integrity  of  the  Council  of  Constance,  but 
we  are  obliged  to  think  of  the  Catholic  Church  in  this  period 
merely  as  a  political  system,  and  there  can  be  little  doubt  that 
the  sacrifice  of  Huss  was  a  political  necessity.  John  Huss  had 
borrowed  his  creed  very  largely  from  Wyclif,  whose  teaching 
had  been  condemned  five  times  in  Bulls  by  Gregory  XL,  and  on 
every  occasion  since,  on  which  they  had  been  brought  into 
prominence.  Wyclif  was  an  idealist,  and  the  Utopia  which  he 
constructed  out  of  the  papal  criticism  of  his  age  had  no  point 


THE  SCHISM  AND  THE  COUNCILS  241 

of  contact  with  the  world  of  fifteenth  century  conditions.  In 
England,  the  religion  of  the  heart,  which  Wyclif  taught,  was 
degraded  by  his  followers  into  a  spurious  and  unthinking 
socialism.  Carried  to  Bohemia  through  the  influence  of 
Richard  11. 's  marriage,  the  system  of  Wyclif  bcame  identified 
with  the  national  movement  of  the  Czechs  against  the  Germans, 
which  had  its  centre  at  Prague.  John  Huss  himself,  like  Wyclif, 
believed  in  the  possibility  of  a  kingdom  of  God  on  earth :  no 
man,  according  to  his  teaching,  who  had  committed  a  mortal 
sin  could  be  a  temporal  ruler,  a  bishop,  or  a  priest — "  because 
his  temporal  or  spiritual  authority,  his  office,  and  his  dignity 
would  not  be  approved  by  God".  Such  a  creed  was  in  itself  a 
challenge  to  the  ecclesiastical  system  as  it  confronted  Huss  and 
his  followers.  Before  accepting  the  invitation  to  the  Council, 
Huss  was  warned  that  it  might  mean  his  death,  but  he  knew 
that  it  was  also  his  great  opportunity,  and  trusting  in  the  safe- 
conduct  of  Sigismund  he  set  out  for  Constance.  His  fearlessness 
in  examination  and  his  uncompromising  consistency  made  him 
an  easy  victim  to  the  Council  in  its  character  of  inquisition. 
By  the  logical  extension  of  his  principles  to  a  criticism  of 
temporal  authority,  he  lost  the  support  of  Sigismund,  and  on 
July  6  he  was  burned,  protesting  to  the  last  his  loyalty  to  the 
Catholic  faith. 

In  one  sense  Huss  was  the  scapegoat  of  the  Cardinals,  who 
had  successfully  diverted  the  streams  of  reform  into  the  one 
channel  in  which  they  were  safe.  As  the  guardians  of  orthodoxy, 
the  Cardinals  restored  their  prestige  in  the  Council  which  had 
Buffered  a  check  in  the  proceeding's  against  John  XXIII.  They 
could  now  make  assurance  doubly  sure  by  pressing  for  the 
election  of  a  new  Pope.  Their  plans  were  helped  by  the  absence 
of  Sigismund,  who  undertook  a  diplomatic  expedition  to  Spain 
and  France,  from  July,  1415,  to  January,  1417.  In  his  absence 
the  aristocratic  Church  party  managed  successfully  to  do 
nothing.  Jerome  of  Prague  followed  John  Huss  to  the  stake, 
and  the  unorthodox  works  of  Jean  Petit  were  condemned 
through  the  influence  of  Gerson.  It  was  easy  to  prolong 
theological  discussion  to  the  exclusion  of  practical  reform,  with 
the  result  that  Sigismund  found  on  his  return,  the  Cardinals  all- 
powerful,  and  his  own  position  considerably  weakened.  More- 
over, the  national  antagonisms,  which  had  been  temporarily  set 
aside,  could  no  longer  be  controlled.  Relations  were  strained  to 
breaking  point  between  the  English  and  the  French,  and  owing 
to  this  and  the  influence  of  DAilly,  France  was  unanimous  in 
supporting  the  demands  of  the  Cardinals  for  the  election  of  a 
16 


242    A  SHOKT  HISTORY  OF  THEi  PAPACY 

new  Pope.  Germany  was  divided  against  itself,  and  a  hostile 
league  of  Rhenish  electors  had  long  been  threatening  Sigismund 
with  trouble.  In  vain  Sigismund  pleaded  that  at  Pisa  the 
election  of  a  new  Pope  had  proved  fatal  to  reform :  the  very- 
word  had  lost  its  power  to  kindle  the  enthusiasm  of  the  wearied 
and  impatient  delegates.  The  desertion  of  England  turned  the 
scale  against  the  reformation  party.  Henry  V.  and  Cardinal 
Beaufort  decided  to  throw  in  their  lot  with  the  papal  party,  and 
in  January,  1418,  an  election  was  held  by  the  Cardinals  together 
with  thirty  delegates  from  the  Council,  six  from  each  nation. 
Sigismund  had  to  take  what  consolation  was  afforded  by  the 
decree  Frequens,  which  provided  for  another  Council  to  be  held 
in  five  years,  to  be  followed  by  others  every  ten  years  in  the 
future. 

The  election  of  Oddo  Colonna  as  Martin  V.  (1417-1431) 
showed  that  the  Cardinals  were  wise  in  their  generation,  for  no 
one  was  better  fitted  to  cope  with  the  restoration  of  papal  power. 
No  one,  either,  was  less  likely  to  give  trouble  with  projects 
of  reform.  His  first  announcement  was  that  it  was  impious  to 
appeal  to  a  Council  against  a  papal  decision — a  measure  which 
he  succeeded  in  carrying  by  a  skilful  manipulation  of  the 
national  divisions,  in  spite  of  the  opposition  of  Gerson  and 
others,  who  realised  that  it  was  suicidal  for  the  conciliar  move- 
ment. To  satisfy  Sigismund's  party,  a  few  uncontestable  reform 
measures  were  carried,  and  other  disputed  points  were  referred 
to  Concordats  issued  separately  to  each  nation.  The  dissolution 
of  the  Council  in  May,  1418,  was  clearly  a  relief  to  every  one,  for 
its  zeal  had  languished  and  its  usefulness  was  obviously  extinct. 
Those  who  had  set  out  in  1415  to  redeem  Israel  must  have 
longed  to  bury  their  shattered  ideals  in  their  native  lands.  The 
national  Concordats  proved  to  be  worthless,  except  in  the  case  of 
France,  and  the  Hussite  wars  were  soon  to  show  that  heresy  had 
not  been  extinguished  by  the  condemnation  of  a  few  honest 
men.  For  its  achievement  the  Council  could  point  to  the  unity 
of  Christendom  and  the  power  of  the  true  Pope  Martin  V. 

Meanwhile,  of  the  two  veterans  of  schism,  Gregory  XII.  and 
Benedict  XIII.,  Benedict  still  held  out,  indomitable  to  the  last. 
The  desertion  of  Spain,  the  personal  visit  of  Sigismund,  and  the 
anathema  of  the  Council  failed  to  shake  the  composure  of  the 
ninety-year-old  anti-pope.  A  warrior  to  the  last,  he  shut  him- 
self up  with  his  two  Cardinals  on  the  rock  of  Peniscola,  where 
he  kept  his  solitary  state,  wearing  the  papal  tiara  and  secretly 
supported  by  Alfonso  of  Aragon.  His  rival  had  ended  his  days 
in  peace  and  dignity  as  legate  of  Ancona,  in  1417,  but  Peter  de 


THE  SCHISM  AND  THE  COUNCILS  243 

Luna  lived  till  1423,  still  asserting  his>  rights  and  insisting  on 
the  election  of  a  successor  to  vindicate  them  after  his  death. 
Nothing  in  the  career  of  Benedict  XIII.  compels  our  admira- 
tion so  much  as  the  sublime  obstinacy  of  his  thirty  years' 
"  contumacy  ". 


PART  IV 

THE  RENAISSANCE  AND  THE  REFORMATION 


CHAPTER  XXII 
THE  RECOVERY:  MARTIN  V.  AND  EUGENIUS  IV.,  a.d.  1418-1447 

MARTIN  V.  was  Italian  in  aspiration  and  in  sympathy, 
but  he  was  wise  enough  not  to  plunge  into  Italian 
politics  before  he  had  had  time  to  consider  the  situa- 
tion. He,  therefore,  spent  three  useful  months  at  Geneva,  re- 
ceiving  embassies  of  congratulation,  while  he  weighed  in  his 
mind  the  relative  advantages  of  every  possible  line  of  Itahan 
policy.  As  a  Colonna,  he  would  naturally  have  wanted  to  go 
straight  to  Rome,  to  live  amongst  his  powerful  relations  and  his 
family  palaces.  But  this  was  the  one  course  entirely  out  of  the 
question,  for  Rome  was  the  centre  of  a  great  duel  between  the 
two  mightiest  men  in  Italy,  Braccio  and  Sforza.  Round  these 
brilliant  generals  the  quarrels  of  the  Italian  states  grouped  them- 
selves, and  their  personal  rivalry  had  become  the  determining 
factor'in  Itahan  politics.  After  some  hesitation,  Martin  accepted 
the  invitation  of  the  Florentines  to  make  his  headquarters 
among  them.  His  reception  in  Italy  was  magnificent,  and  the 
enthusiasm  which  greeted  him  was  all  the  more  gratifying  be- 
cause  it  bore  so  little  relation  to  his  territorial  strength. 

As  a  landless  vagrant  Pope,  Martin  V.  looked  out  Irom  Flor- 
ence on  an  Italy  which  was  curiously  changed  from  the  Italy 
which  his  predecessors  had  known.     The  two  great  catastrophies 
which  had  overwhelmed  the  Papacy  during  the  fourteenth  cen- 
tury had  the  effect  of  withdrawing  the  Pope  a  little  from  the 
ordinary  current  of  Italian  life.     Controversy  and  war  had  filled 
their  feverish  sojourns  in  Italy,  and  intercepted  that  close  touch 
on  atmospheric  conditions  which  is  characteristic  of  the  most 
successful  periods  of  papal  policy.     Apart  from  this,  the  fifteenth 
century,  after  the  time  of  the  Council  of  Constance,  turns  a  new 
page  in  history.     Ahready  there  were  signs  that  the  mind  of 
Christendom  had  grown  stale  in  controversy,  and  that  a  newer, 
fresher,  intellectual  life  was  waiting  for  it  in  the  kingdom  of  Art 
and  Learning.     While  the  Papacy  had  languished  in  the  sinister 
luxury   of  the  fortress-palace  of    Avignon,   Italy    had    passed 
through  the  "  Heroic  Age  "  of  the  Renaissance.     When  Martin 

247 


248  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

came  to  Florence  in  1418,  the  spring-time  of  Art  was  filling  the 
city  with  beauty.  Giotto's  "  lily-tower  "  had  been  its  pride  for 
half  a  century  :  the  Duomo  and  the  Baptistery  were  being  finished 
under  the  inspiration  of  Donatello,  Ghiberti,  and  Brunelleschi. 
Fra  Angelico  was  weaving  his  dreams  out  of  the  double  thread 
drawn  from  the  doctrinal  controversies  of  the  old  century,  and 
the  spirit  of  beauty  abroad  in  the  new.  The  civic  life  of  Florence, 
intense,  vital,  and  full  of  movement,  swept  past  the  monastery 
of  Santa  Maria  Novella,  where  Martin  V.  was  staying,  in  the 
many- coloured  stream  which  is  familiar  to  us  through  the  pic- 
tures of  Masaccio. 

In  history,  as  in  art,  new  life  comes  into  the  picture :  in 
politics,  as  in  other  spheres,  the  fifteenth  century  is  the  epoch 
of  character.  The  people  we  meet  are  not  merely  picturesque — 
they  are  individual,  with  a  psychology  as  subtle  as  that  of  the 
characters  in  modern  politics.  The  chronicles,  especially  of 
Italy,  become  more  vivid  in  response  to  the  appeal  of  personality, 
and  the  decorative  social  life  of  the  Quattrocento  illuminates 
contemporary  records  with  a  new  and  graceful  pageantry. 

Martin  soon  saw  that  his  chief  advantage  lay  in  the  fluctuating 
state  of  Italy.  Everywhere  there  was  movement.  Venice  was 
expanding  her  mainland  territories  in  order  to  protect  her  trade 
routes.  Filippo  Maria  Visconti  was  spreading  his  dominions— 
at  the  expense  of  the  lesser  lordships  and  mushroom  republics 
which  had  succeeded  in  throwing  ofi"  the  yoke  of  his  father.  In 
the  south,  the  misrule  of  Joanna  of  Naples  was  driving  her  king- 
dom to  distraction :  a  nonentity  herself,  Joanna  was  ruled  by  a 
succession  of  incompetent  favourites,  who  exasperated  the 
nobles  and  crippled  the  power  of  the  condottieri.  The  succes- 
sion question  added  to  the  unfortunate  kingdom's  embarrass- 
ments, for  Joanna  was  a  childless  widow  of  forty-seven.  For 
these  very  reasons,  Martin  chose  to  enter  the  arena  through  the 
door  of  Naples,  conscious,  perhaps,  of  his  unusual  gift  for  "  fish- 
ing in  troubled  waters,"  and  acquiring  personal  gain.  Besides, 
Braccio  held  Rome,  and  Joanna  had  Sforza  in  her  pay.  Martin, 
therefore,  allied  himself  with  Joanna,  and  Sforza  was  glad 
enough  to  incorporate  the  cause  of  the  Church  with  that  of 
Naples  in  his  operations  against  Braccio  in  Rome.  But  the 
instability  of  Joanna  made  her  an  unsatisfactory  ally,  and 
Sforza  and  Braccio  were  too  evenly  matched  for  alliance  with 
either  of  them  to  be  profitable  at  this  moment.  A  readjustment 
suggested  itself  to  Martin,  which  reveals  him  as  an  excellent 
politician.  If  he  could  detach  both  the  military  masters  of 
Italy  from  their  present  pre-occupations — Sforza  from  Naples, 


RECOVEEY:  MARTIN  V.  AND  EUGENIUS  IV.     249 

and  Braccio  from  his  ambitions  in  Rome — he  could  then  employ 
them  both  in  separate  fields  of  enterprise,  with  the  length  of 
Italy  between  them,  and  a  common  cause  to  unite  them.  To 
circumvent  the  rivalry  between  these  two  was  half-way  towards 
the  peace  of  Italy,  and  the  whole  way  to  the  attainment  of  Rome. 
Early  in  1420,  Sforza  visited  Martin  in  Florence.  It  was  far 
from  easy  to  persuade  him  to  make  peace  with  Braccio,  and, 
when  this  was  done,  it  was  a  much  less  serious  task  to  detach 
him  from  Joanna,  and  to  commend  to  him  the  claims  of  Louis 
III.  of  Anjou  to  the  succession  in  Naples.  Hard  on  the  heels  of 
Sforza  came  Braccio,  dressed  with  an  eye  to  Florentine  favour 
in  purple  and  gold,  and  riding  at  the  head  of  four  hundred 
horsemen  in  gold  and  silver  armour.  He,  too,  made  his  bargain 
with  Martin ;  he  was  confirmed  in  Perugia  and  the  other  towns 
which  he  had  stolen  from  the  Pope,  in  return  for  the  conquest 
of  rebellious  Bologna.  But  Braccio's  visit  cost  Martin  much 
more  than  a  few  towns  in  the  March  of  Ancona,  for  through  it 
he  had  learnt  the  humiUating  truth  that  the  Italian  public  was 
far  more  impressed  by  a  brilliant  soldier  of  fortune  than  by  a 
penniless  Pope.  When  he  left  Florence  later  in  the  year,  the 
rhyme  was  still  ringing  in  his  ears  which  the  Florentine  boys 
had  sung  as  they  ran  along  the  streets  beside  Braccio's  shining 

escort : — 

Braccio  valente 
Vince  ogni  gente 
n  Papa  Martino 
Non  vale  un  quattrino. 

— (Creighton,  II.,  p.  139.) 

"  Poor  Pope  Martin  isn't  worth  a  farthing  .  .  .,"  Martin  re- 
peated in  disgust  to  the  Florentine  Bruni,  a  few  days  before  he 
left  the  city. 

His  return  to  Rome  was  not  likely  to  improve  Martin's  spirits, 
and  the  contrast  between  the  desolation  which  he  found  there 
and  the  beauty  and  prosperity  which  he  had  left  behind  in 
Florence  must  have  wounded  his  Roman  patriotism.  Platina, 
writing  half-a-century  later,  thus  describes  Martin's  home- 
coming :  "  When  he  came  he  found  the  city  of  Rome  so  dilapi- 
dated that  it  looked  nothing  like  a  city.  You  might  have  seen 
the  houses  ready  to  totter,  the  churches  fallen  down,  the  streets 
empty,  the  city  full  of  dirt  and  mire,  and  in  extreme  want  of  all 
sorts  of  provisions.  What  should  I  say  more?  There  was 
neither  the  face  of  a  city  nor  any  sign  of  civility  there,  the 
citizens  seeming  rather  sojourners  and  vagabonds.  The  good 
Pope   was  troubled  to  see  it,  and  applied  himself  to  adorning 


250  A  SHOET  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

of  the  city  and  reforming  the  citizens'  manners,  so  that  in  a 
short  time  it  looked  much  better  than  before  "  (Platina,  "  Life  of 
Martin  V.").  Martin,  as  a  Roman  noble,  could  not  resist  the 
impulse  to  concentrate  on  the  great  work  of  restoration,  and  it 
is  in  this  that  he  earned  the  love  of  the  Romans  as  "  Temporum 
Buorum  felicitas  "  (Tomb  of  Martin  V.).  The  course  of  events 
in  politics  encom-aged  him,  for  the  breach  in  Naples  between 
Joanna  and  the  heir  of  her  choice,  Alfonso  of  Aragon,  had  led  to 
a  general  peace  in  1422.  Louis  of  Anjou  stayed  in  Rome,  the 
guest  and  dependent  of  Martin,  ready  to  be  produced  at  any 
moment  as  a  stick  to  beat  Alfonso  with  in  the  inevitable  renewal 
of  hostihties.  Alfonso  carried  on  operations  on  his  own  account, 
and  Braccio  hurried  from  the  conquest  of  Bologna  to  fight 
another  round  of  his  duel  with  Sforza.  But  in  1424  the  two 
great  rivals  both  fell  in  the  Neapolitan  war.  Braccio  was  stabbed 
by  an  exiled  Perugian  who  bore  him  a  grudge,  and  Sforza  was 
drowned  in  an  attempt  to  save  the  life  of  a  young  follower  who 
was  fording  the  river  Pescara.  Their  deaths  gave  Italy  the  first 
real  chance  of  peace  since  Martin's  accession,  and  the  immediate 
result  was  the  reconciliation  between  Martin  and  Alfonso  of 
Aragon,  through  the  influence  of  a  Spanish  envoy  who  thus 
introduces  to  papal  history  the  notorious  name  of  Borgia. 

Martin  V.  was  the  first  Pope  since  the  age  of  Boniface  VIIL 
and  Clement  V.  to  use  nepotism  and  family  connections  as  a 
serious  factor  in  his  policy.  In  his  recovery  of  the  papal  States 
he  found  this  an  immense  advantage.  As  a  Colonna  he  could 
rely  on  the  support  of  one  of  the  two  great  Roman  families, 
and  with  the  prestige  of  the  Papacy  behind  him  it  was  com- 
paratively easy  to  buy  off  the  Orsini  with  fiefs  and  marriage 
alliances.  The  failure  of  the  reform  movement  was  stamped  on 
the  face  of  Italy  by  the  family  policy  of  Martin  V.,  and  yet  it  is 
impossible  wholly  to  condemn  him  for  taking  the  only  obvious 
way  out  of  his  difficulties.  The  States  of  the  Church  had  been 
too  long  alienated  to  be  recovered  by  the  exercise  of  papal 
claims  and  spiritual  denunciations.  It  was  better,  in  Martin's 
eyes,  to  retrieve  them  for  the  Pope's  family  than  to  let  them 
pass  right  out  of  his  control.  From  Joanna  he  got  two  large 
fiefs  for  his  brothers,  who  became  Prince  of  Salerno  and  Count 
of  Alba  respectively.  By  marriage  alliances  he  won  over  the 
Orsini,  the  Gsetani,  and  Guido  of  Montefeltro.  A  Colonna 
marriage  was  no  mesalliance  for  the  greatest  of  Italian  princes 
and  a  Colonna  nepotate  could  not  be  regarded  as  an  upstart, 
however  ambitious  his  pretensions.  It  is  true  that  the  Papacy 
could  not  use  marriages  to  the  same  efl'ect  as  they  could  be  used 


RECOVEEY:  MARTIN  V.  AND  EUGENIUS  IV.     251 

by  an  hereditary  monarchy,  for  the  advantages  gained  were 
personal,  and  limited  to  the  lifetime  of  the  Pope.  But,  as  in 
the  case  of  Martin,  nepotism  often  meant  immediate  political 
success,  especially  in  an  age  when  good  generals  could  always 
be  bought  by  a  powerful  family,  and  a  wise  Pope  would  be 
careful  to  leave  a  family  representative  among  the  Cardinals, 
who  would  have  a  good  chance  of  reaping  the  rewards  of  the 
future. 

Martin's  most  serious  danger  was  the  remnant  of  the  reform 
party,  which  held  him  to  the  promise  given  at  Constance  that  a 
Council  should  be  called  to  deal  more  thoroughly  with  this  in- 
convenient question.     In  1423,  Martin  was  obliged  to  summon 
a  Council  to  Pavia,  which  was  subsequently  removed  to  Siena. 
The  Pope's  attitude  was  so  obviously  hostile  that  the  delegates 
were   discouraged ;    many  of  them  were  bought  over,  and  the 
others   felt   themselves   insulted.     The   curial    party    carefully 
sowed  dissensions   among   the   nations,    and  no  one  was  sorry 
when   after  a  few  months  the  legates  published  a  Bull  of  dis- 
solution.    The  Council  of  Siena  was  too  complete  a  failure  to  be 
politic,  and  Martin,  with  his  usual  skill  in  getting  the  best  out 
of  an  awkward  situation,  followed  it  up  with  a  reforming  edict  of 
his   own,    which  he  published  in  the  following  year.     Martin's 
reforms  were  entirely  directed  against  the  Cardinals,  who  had 
reaped  to  the  full  the  advantages  of  their  victory  at  Constance. 
Martin  now  earned  their  undying  displeasure  by  his  provisions 
for  their  decorous  hving  and  his  strict  limitation  of  their  house- 
holds.    He  thereby  disarmed  the  cities,  who  looked  on  him  as 
the   opponent  of  reform,  and  at  the  same  time  made  himself 
more  than  ever  master  of  his  own  house.     The  cry  of  reform  was 
not  raised   again   until  the  end  of  his  reign,  when  the  storm 
brewing   in   Bohemia    impelled    Martin    to    summon    another 
Council  just  before  he  died. 

In  foreign  policy,  Martin  was  less  successful  than  in  Italy, 
but  he  did  not  lose  ground.  The  concordats  issued  from  Con- 
stance left  a  legacy  of  trouble  by  the  recognition  and  encourage- 
ment which  they  gave  to  the  national  Churches.  France  in 
particular  had  advanced  extravagant  claims  of  independence. 
But  the  accession  of  Charles  VII.  in  1425,  and  his  eagerness  for 
the  Pope's  support,  created  a  reaction  in  Martin's  favour. 
Annates  and  appeals  were  restored  in  spite  of  the  protests  of  the 
Parlement.  In  England  he  was  less  successful,  but  the  weak- 
ness of  Archbishop  Chichele  disguised  his  defeat.  The  anti- 
papal  laws  of  England  had  rankled  in  the  minds  of  many  Popes. 
"  Among  Christians  no  States  have  made  ordinances  contrary  to 


252  A  SHOKT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

the  liberty  of  the  Church  save  England  and  Venice,"  Martin 
wrote  to  England,  demanding  a  repeal  of  the  statues  of  Pro- 
visors  and  Praemunire.  But  England  was  too  full  of  Lollards, 
and  Parliament  was  too  proud  of  the  anti-papal  laws  for  the 
Archbishop  even  to  get  a  hearing.  All  that  Martin  could  do 
was  to  withdraw  from  an  untenable  position  and  to  vent  his 
anger  on  Chichele  by  suspending  his  legatine  authority.  Car- 
dinal Beaufort  also  proved  a  broken  reed,  for  he  collected  troops 
for  a  Hussite  Crusade  at  the  request  of  the  Pope,  and  proceeded 
to  march  them  off  to  the  wars  in  France.  Martin  had  got 
nothing  out  of  England,  but  he  had  successfully  asserted  his 
right  to  interfere. 

Meanwhile  he  had  been  devoting  himself  with  enthusiasm  to 
the  restoration  of  Rome.  A  terrible  flood  in  1422  had  thrown 
the  work  back,  and  increased  the  poverty  which  was  already 
calamitous.  But  since  then,  Martin  himself,  and  his  Cardinals, 
exhorted  by  him,  had  undertaken  lavish  plans  for  the  preserva- 
tion and  adornment  of  the  Churches.  Five  hundred  thousand 
gold  florins  were  spent  on  the  roof  of  St.  Peter's.  To  St.  John 
Lateran  Martin  gave  its  beautiful  mosaic  floor,  and  Gentile  da 
Fabriano  was  employed  to  adorn  its  walls.  The  age  of  the  great 
art  patrons  had  hardly  yet  arrived,  but  Martin  was  generous  to 
artists,  and  showed  a  genuine  love  of  beauty  in  details  of  adorn- 
ment. His  presents  were  always  exquisite,  and  their  intrinsic 
beauty  must  have  excited  as  great  a  pleasure  as  the  honour  which 
they  conferred.  To  men  of  rank  he  gave  caps  and  swords  of 
honour,  to  great  ladies  golden  roses:  the  rings  which  he  be- 
stowed on  the  Cardinals  of  his  creation  were  finely  wrought, 
and  to  the  captains  who  fought  the  battles  of  the  Holy  See 
he  presented  wonderful  banners  and  images  of  saints.  The 
beautiful  tiara  and  the  clasp  of  his  Florentine  cope  were  as  per- 
fect as  Ghiberti's  art  could  make  them.  But  Martin's  own 
pleasure  in  these  things  was  limited :  he  used  the  talents  of  his 
artists  as  he  used  the  skill  of  his  generals,  to  bring  back  the 
lustre  of  the  papal  crown.  His  attitude  to  the  early  humanist 
movement  was  very  much  the  same.  He  showed  Httle  personal 
interest  in  the  revival  of  learning :  he  was  suspicious  of  it,  and 
not  without  reason  disapproved  of  some  of  its  votaries.  When 
the  body  of  St,  Monica  was  brought  to  Rome  in  the  course  of  his 
pontificate,  he  preached  on  her  virtues,  as  the  mother  of  St. 
Augustine,  in  words  which  must  have  distressed  the  humanists 
in  his  audience.  "  While  we  possess  Augustine,"  he  says,  "  what 
care  we  for  the  sagacity  of  Aristotle,  the  eloquence  of  Plato,  the 
prudence  of  Varro,  the  dignified  gravity  of  Socrates,  the  authority 


EECOVERY:  MARTIN  V.  AND  EUGENIUS  IV.       253 

of  Pythagoras,  or  the  skill  of  Empedocles  ?  We  do  not  need  these 
men;  Augustine  is  enough  for  us."  And  yet  among  Martin's 
Cardinals  were  Capranica  and  Cesarini,  who  were  humanists  at 
heart,  Prospero  Colonna,  his  nephew,  who  was  famous  for  his 
library,  and  Giordano  Orsini,  whose  unique  collection  of  manu- 
scripts'was  left  to  the  Papacy  in  the  time  of  Martin's  successor. 
Among  the  secretaries  we  find  Poggio,  the  brilliant  Latinist,  and 
Valla,  his  future  antagonist,  both  more  interested  in  turning  the 
latest  scandals  of  the  Curia  into  scurrilous  Latin  than  in  retailing 
the  edifying  discourses  of  the  Pope. 

In  February,  1431,  Martin  V.  died,  in  the  same  month  in 
which  he  had  summoned  the  Council  of  Basle.  He  had  aimed 
at  an  achievement  well  within  his  reach,  and  for  this  reason  he 
was  extraordinarily  successful.  His  common  sense  and  shrewd- 
ness taught  him  to  reap  every  possible  advantage  from  the  em- 
barrassments  of  his  neighbours,  and  he  never  tried  to  run  against 
the  wind.  He  accepted  things  as  they  came,  without  enthusiasm 
and  without  opposition ;  the  Renaissance,  the  Councils,  and  the 
rivalries  of  condottieri  all  brought  grist  to  the  papal  mill.  While 
we  praise  his  quiet  energy,  it  is  unreasonable  to  deplore  that  it 
stopped  short  of  the  moral  reformation.  To  effect  this  he  must 
have  brought  into  play  quahties  the  very  opposite  to  those  which 
made  him  a  great  temporal  Pope. 

The  Cardinals  in  conclave  in  1431  were  determined  not  to 
suffer  again  the  indignities  thrust  upon  them  by  Martin  V. 
They  therefore  drew  up  a  code  for  the  future  Pope  to  safeguard 
their  dignities  before  they  proceeded  to  an  election.  They  then 
proceeded  to  elect  a  middle-class  Venetian,  who  had  the  reputa- 
tion among  them  of  a  harmless  nonentity.  Gabriel  Condulmier 
was  a  good  figure-head,  of  a  usefully  pious  disposition  :  here  his 
advantages  stopped.  As  Eugenius  IV.  (1431-1447)  he  soon 
showed  himself  to  be  a  tactless  and  obstinate  person,  who,  hke 
the  unfortunate  Urban  VI.,  acted  on  impulses  and  never  aban- 
doned a  foolish  plan.  He  began  his  reign  by  a  quarrel  with  the 
relations  of  Martin  V.  In  his  attempt  to  crush  them  he  merely 
created  a  hostile  party  in  the  Curia  and  destroyed  the  peace  of 
Rome.  Cardinal  Prospero  Colonna,  and  the  Colonna  prot6g6, 
Cardinal  Capranica,  carried  their  quarrel  over  the  Alps,  and  at 
the  Council  of  Basle,  which  was  now  assembling,  they  incited 
that  feeling  of  personal  hostility  to  Eugenius  which  is  traceable 
in  all  its  doings. 

The  diflaculties  of  Eugenius  were  not  all  of  his  own  making, 
although  he  showed  an  astonishing  incompetence  in  dealing 
with  them.     But  even  Martin  V.  had  feared  the  Council,  which 


254  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

nothing  but  necessity  would  have  led  him  to  summon.  The 
followers  of  John  Huss  in  Bohemia  had  organised  themselves, 
smce  the  Council  of  Constance,  into  an  army  of  militant  Protes- 
tantism. Sigismund  had  led  three  unsuccessful  military  expedi- 
tions against  the  Hussites,  and  early  in  1431,  a  Crusade,  headed 
by  Cardmal  Cesarmi,  suffered  a  defeat  which  had  shaken  the 
Catholic  world.  It  was  clear  that  orthodoxy  could  not  win  with 
the  sword,  and  it  remained  for  the  Council  to  find  another 
solution  Under  the  influence  of  Cesarini-a  man  utterly  to  be 
respected,  in  whom  his  contemporaries  recognised  qualities  far 
above  the  standard  of  his  times-the  Hussites  were  invited  to  a 
Conference  with  the  Council,  in  which  the  articles  of  their  faith 
were  to  be  discussed  by  "  men  in  whom  you  trust  that  the  spirit 
of  the  Lord  rests,  gentle,  God-fearing,  humble,  desirous  of  peace, 

Botemians)  '''^''  ^""^  *^^    *^'''^'    ""^  ^^"'*"    ^^^^^"^  *° 

To  the  consternation  of  Cesarini,  Eugenius,  at  this  point, 
showed  his  opposition  to  the  Council  by  sending  a  Bull  of  dis- 
solution  to  Basle.  The  Pope  had  taken  alarm  at  the  democratic 
character  of  the  Council,  and  his  rigid  monastic  training  made 
him  unprepared  to  consent  to  negotiate  with  heretics.  In  vain 
Cesarini  entreated  him  to  withdraw  his  Bull ;  Eugenius  showed 
an  utter  incapacity  to  grasp  the  situation.  He  thought  he  could 
count  on  the  support  of  Sigismund,  for  Sigismund  wanted  to  be 
crowned,  and  Eugenms  could  postpone  the  imperial  coronation 
at  his  pleasure.  In  order  to  remain  loyal  to  the  Pope,  Cesarini 
was  obliged  to  resign  the  presidency  of  the  Council,  and  the 
result  was    that   the    anti-papal   party   opened   an   attack   on 

fii?T''  ^"".^.^'f^^'"^  ^^^  "contumacious".  In  September, 
1432,  Cesarini  took  up  the  presidency  again,  hoping  to  control 
the  animosity  of  the  Council,  and  reconcile  it  with  the  Pope  be- 
!L'  il^'^n  *''''  n^*';     Sigismund  held  the  key  to  the  situation, 

thth  r.^^P  *^'''^'''  ^^^P*'^  ^'"^  ^^^^^  its  protection 
which  led  the  Pope  to  reopen  negotiations.  But  Eugenius  took 
a  superior  tone,  and  only  consented  to  recognise  the  Council  on 
terms  which  would  cripple  its  power  of  action.  Probably  he 
knew  that  the  crown  could  be  dangled  a  little  longer  in  front  of 
Sigismund  s  eyes,  and  he  was  right.  Sigismund,  who  had  got  as 
lar  as  Siena,  was  determined  to  reach  Kome  at  all  costs.  He 
therefore  cooled  in  his  attitude  to  the  Council,  urged  it  to 
moderation,  and,  in  alliance  with  Eugenius,  achieved  his  heart's 
desire.  But  the  combination  could  not  last.  Neither  Eugenius 
nor  Sigismund  had  any  resources  to  speak  of,  and  both  were 
deep    in    embarrassments.      Fihppo   Maria   Visconti,   Duke    of 


RECOVERY:  MARTIN  V.  AND  EUGENIUS  IV.      255 

Milan,  was  posing  as  the  champion  of  the  Council  in  order  to 
oppose  Sigismund,  whose  imperial  claims  to  Milan  might  become 
inconvenient.  Filippo  sent  the  two  rising  young  condottieri 
against  the  Pope  and  the  Emperor  in  the  name  of  the  Council. 
To  Rome  he  sent  Fortebraccio,  the  nephew  of  Martin's  scourge, 
and  to  the  March  of  Ancona  he  sent  Sforza  the  younger. 
Fortebraccio  found  supporters  among  the  Colonnesi,  and  soon 
the  news  of  the  Pope's  ignominious  flight  to  Florence  delighted 
the  ears  of  the  fathers  at  Basle.  Eugenius  had  to  accept  the 
inevitable.  From  Florence  he  surrendered  to  the  Council  of 
Basle,  where  Sigismund  had  arrived  just  in  time  to  prevent  the 
Pope's  deposition.  He  had  to  confirm  Sforza's  conquests  in  the 
March,  thus  turning  the  hired  adversary  of  a  moment  into  the 
territorial  foe  of  the  future. 

The  Council  had  been  occupied  meanwhile  in  the  Hussite 

negotiations,   untroubled  by  the   attitude   of  the   Pope.      The 

dignity  and  the  reality  of  the  speeches  on  both  sides  show  that 

the  time  had  arrived  when  controversy  could  be  carried  on  with- 

out  recrimination,  and  when  men  could  discuss  their  diflferences 

without   hostility.     Of  course,  Cesarini's   task   in   keeping  the 

peace  was  not  a  light  one,  and  the  congress  occasionally  fell  to 

wrangling.     But  the  general  level  was  admirable,  and  the  war 

of  orators   seldom  spoiled   it.     The  discussion   turned   on   the 

Four  Articles  of  Prag,  which  embodied  the  contentions  of  the 

Hussites,  but  it  soon  became  clear  that  the  Bohemians  were 

divided  among  themselves.     They  were  at  one  in  demanding 

the  Communion  in  both  kinds,  but,  in  the  subtler  articles  of 

their    faith,   the    Taborites,   or    extremists,   far    outpaced  the 

moderate    party,   which  was    essentially   Catholic.     This  was 

clearer  still  at  the  succeeding  Diet  of  Prag,  where  the  envoys  of 

the  Council  produced  proposals  for  reunion.     The  Four  Articles 

were  accepted  in  substance  by  the  Council,  but  the  modifications 

ofi'ended  the   Taborites,  who   ofi"ered  battle   and  were   cut   to 

pieces  under  their  brilliant  general,  Procop,  at  the  battle  of 

Lipan  (August,  1434). 

An  inundation  of  challenges  from  Basle  followed  the  humili- 
ation of  the  Pope.  In  1435,  a  decree  was  passed  abolishing 
annates  and  dues,  and  the  next  year  saw  the  audacious  claim 
of  the  Council  to  issue  indulgences  on  its  own  authority. 
Success,  however,  brought  reaction,  and  the  Council  soon  found 
that  it  had  overshot  the  mark.  The  confiscation  of  the  papal 
revenue  threatened  not  only  Eugenius  but  the  very  exist- 
ence of  the  Curia,  and  the  "saner  minority"  of  the  Council 
were  unprepared  for  such  an  extreme  course  of  destruction.     A 


256  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

new  question  came  to  the  front  with  the  beginning  of  overtures 
from  the  Greeks  for  reunion  with  Latin  Christendom.  The 
desire  of  the  Greeks  was  not  disinterested,  and  had  little 
theological  foundation.  The  Greek  Emperor,  John  Palsologos, 
wanted  a  Crusade  against  the  Turks,  who  were  threatening  the 
very  gates  of  his  capital.  When  the  Council  tried  to  carry  on 
the  negotiations,  they  found  that  the  Pope  had  forestalled  them. 
In  answer  to  the  envoy  who  carried  the  reform  decree  of  the 
Council  to  Constantinople,  the  Greeks  rejected  it  with  scorn. 
"  Either  amend  your  edict  or  get  you  gone,"  was  the  reply.  It 
was  clear  that  union  with  the  Greeks  was  to  be  efifected  through 
the  Pope  or  not  at  all :  it  served  as  further  cause  of  dissension 
between  the  Pope  and  the  Council,  and  finally  dropped  out  of 
the  Council's  programme. 

From  this  point  the  fortunes  of  Eugenius  began  to  revive. 
The  Congress  of  Arras  which  had  given  peace  to  France  in  1435, 
was  ascribed  to  Eugenius,  whose  legates  had  arranged  it.  Mean- 
while the  French  radical  party  was  all-powerful  in  the  Council, 
and  the  other  nations  turned  more  and  more  to  the  Pope,  fearing 
that  the  Council  was  heading  for  another  Avignon  "  captivity  ". 
Cesarini  and  Nicholas  of  Cusa  were  now  the  declared  partisans 
of  Eugenius  and  had  given  up  the  hopeless  attempt  to  keep  the 
peace.  The  rock  on  which  the  Pope  and  the  Council  actually 
split  was  the  comparatively  unimportant  point  of  the  town  in 
which  the  conference  with  the  Greeks  should  take  place.  The 
Council  wanted  Avignon— the  Pope  insisted  on  Udine  or  Florence. 
In  the  Cathedral  at  Basle  the  conflicting  decrees  were  published 
simultaneously,  the  envoys  shouting  each  other  down  amid  the 
uproar  of  the  contending  factions.  Then  followed  the  usual 
proceedings:  Eugenius  was  summoned  and  pronounced  contu- 
macious ;  the  next  step  would  be  his  deposition.  Eugenius  on 
his  side  dissolved  the  Council,  and  recalled  the  delegates  to  the 
council  which  he  proposed  to  hold  at  Ferrara. 

Events  in  Italy  had  given  encouragement  to  the  Council  in  its 
extreme  measures.  On  the  death  of  Joanna,  Eugenius  claimed 
Naples  as  a  lapsed  fief  and  sent  Vitelleschi  to  govern  it.  The  re- 
sult was  that  Alfonso  of  Naples  joined  Visconti,  and  took  up  the 
cause  of  the  Council  against  Eugenius,  who  on  his  part  resumed 
the  Angevin  cause  in  Naples.  This  led  directly  to  the  climax 
of  the  unworthy  struggle,  when,  in  1439,  Eugenius  was  deposed, 
and  the  Duke  of  Savoy  was  elected  by  the  Council  as  Felix  V. 
The  catastrophe  of  schism  had  once  more  befallen  the  Papacy, 
but  the  attitude  of  Europe  was  surprisingly  calm.  Germany 
remained  sturdily  neutral :  a  few  princes  declared  for  Felix  V., 


RECOVEEY:  MAETIN  V.  AND  EUGENIUS  IV.     257 

and  to  win  over  the  rest  became  the  whole  object  of  conciliar 
policy.  Sigismund  had  died  in  1437,  worn  out  by  the  legacy  of 
trouble  which  the  Council  had  left  for  him  in  Bohemia.  Albert 
II.  his  short-lived  successor,  and  the  Electors  had  declared  for 
neutrality,  but  both  sides  hoped  much  from  Frederick  III., 
whose  indolence  was  as  yet  mistaken  for  prudence.  Tlie  triumph 
of  the  extremists  in  the  Council  had  brought  it  to  ruin.  All  the 
best  men  were  leaving  Basle.  It  was  obliged  to  retract  its 
reforms  in  order  to  provide  for  the  anti-pope,  and  thus  put  an 
end  to  its  moral  pretensions.  Felix  himself  was  dissatisfied 
with  it  and  in  1443  he  deserted  it  for  the  more  profitable 
alliance  of  the  Electors.  The  Council  henceforth  simmered  out 
in  ignominious  neglect. 

Eugenius  could  not  take  any  credit  to  himself  for  his  victory 
over  the  Council  of  Basle.     Its  disruption  had  come  from  within, 
and  his  sood  fortune  lay  solely  in  the  characters  of  his  sup- 
porters—men like  Cesarini  and  Nicolas  of  Cusa,  who  had  the 
courage  of  their  convictions,  and  the  power  of  imposing  them 
on  others.     In  Italy,  the  prestige  which  he  won  at  the  Council 
of  Florence  was  out  of  all  proportion  to  the  advantages  gained 
or  his  share  in  gaining  them.     The  controversy  with  the  Greeks 
was  curious  and  picturesque  rather  than  profitable,  as  far  as  its 
main  object  was   concerned.     The  long-winded  discussions  of 
the  theologians  seemed  to  lead  nowhere  :  the  points  which  were 
all-important  to   the   Greeks   were  hardly   understood  by  the 
Latins,  and  the  Emperor  showed  himself  to  be  far  more  inter- 
ested in  hunting  the  Este  forests  than  in  discussing  the  Filioque 
clause  of  the  creed.     When  the  plague  broke  out  in  Ferrara, 
the   Council  was    removed   to   Florence,   to  the  rehef  of  the 
Marquis  of  Ferrara,  who  had  carefully  preserved  his  game,  and 
of  the  Pope,  who  preferred  the  Greeks  to  be  cut  ofif  from  com- 
munications by  sea.    John  Palseologos  was  disappointed  with 
the  whole  proceeding :  he  had  counted  on  finding  more  disunion, 
and  consequently  more  profit  as  a  partisan,  in  Latin  Christen- 
dom •    he  had  hoped  for  more  politics  and  less  theology,  and 
above  all  for  more  money.     The  aged  Patriarch,  who  had  been 
brought  against  his  will,  was  dying ;  every  one  was  tired  of  the 
endless  discussions,  and  there  was  no  desire  for  union  as  an  end 
in  itself.     Accordingly,  by  a  tacit  agreement,  vague  words  ot 
definition  were  accepted  on  both  sides,  union  was  forced  through 
just  before  the  Patriarch  died,  and  the  Pope  promised  300  men 
and  two  galleys  for  permanent  use  against  the  Turks.     From  a 
theological  point  of  view  the  Union  was  worthless,  and  it  was 
rejected  by  the  Greeks  at  once  ;  but  Europe  did  not  look  beyond 
17 


258  A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

the  published  decree,  and  Eugenius  owed  more  to  it  for  his 
recovery  of  prestige  than  to  anything  else  in  his  reign. 

The  tide  had  turned  for  Eugenius,  and  in  the  last  period  of 
his  pontificate,  if  it  was  not  brilliant,  he  at  least  recovered  much 
of  the  ground  which  he  had  lost.  In  1440  the  way  was  cleared 
for  his  return  to  Rome  by  the  death  of  the  condottiere-Cardinal 
Vitelleschi.  In  the  early  part  of  the  reign  of  Eugenius,  Vitelleschi 
had  won  the  road  to  fame  by  subduing  the  Romagna,  which 
bristled  with  small  tyrants  and  rebel  captains.  The  soldier- 
priest  understood  his  work,  and  did  it  thoroughly.  He  left 
behind  him  a  trail  of  crime  and  cruelty,  and  when  in  1436  he 
had  suppressed  Rome,  he  ruled  it  with  the  iron  hand  of  tyranny. 
He  exterminated  the  last  of  the  Prefects  of  Vico.  He  held 
Romagna  against  the  Colonna  and  Orsini  factions — against 
Sforza  and  Braccio,  the  champions  of  Milan — against  the 
wily  little  Piccinino,  who  was  also  employed  against  Eugenius 
by  Filippo  Maria.  He  cleared  the  Campagna  of  freebooters,  and 
destroyed  thirty  towers  which  had  sheltered  brigands.  There 
was  something  in  the  quality  of  his  daring  which  cast  a  glamour 
over  Eugenius.  He  was  loaded  with  honours ;  he  became  a 
Cardinal,  Archbishop  of  Florence,  and  Patriarch  of  Alexandria. 
Then  suddenly  he  fell,  through  mysterious  circumstances  in 
which  it  is  impossible  to  discover  how  far  Eugenius  was  impli- 
cated. The  Florentines  apparently  suspected  Vitelleschi  of  con- 
spiring against  them  with  Piccinino,  and  they  seem  to  have 
undermined  the  Pope's  confidence  in  him  by  accusing  him  of  a 
desire  to  make  himself  independent  in  Romagna.  As  Vitelleschi 
was  standing  on  the  bridge  of  St.  Angelo,  the  portcullis  was 
suddenly  lowered  between  him  and  his  soldiers  who  had  just 
passed  out.  A  fortnight  later  he  died.  "  A  man  who  has 
achieved  what  I  have  done,"  he  said,  when  he  found  himself  a 
prisoner,  "  ought  not  to  be  arrested,  but  if  he  is,  he  ought  not  to 
be  released.  I  shall  die  not  of  my  wounds  but'of  poison."  His 
successor  in  the  Pope's  favour,  Cardinal  Scarampo,  took  care 
that  his  prediction  should  be  fulfilled.  The  career  of  Vitelleschi, 
the  crimes  which  he  committed  in  the  name  of  the  Church,  and 
his  fall  as  an  "  over-mighty  subject,"  are  typical  of  the  "  restored  " 
Papacy  of  the  fifteenth  century. 

In  1443  Eugenius  changed  his  alliance  with  Venice  and 
Florence  for  an  alliance  with  Alfonso  of  Naples.  He  considered 
that  the  two  cities  had  treated  him  unfairly  in  allowing  Sforza 
to  keep  his  conquests  in  the  March  of  Ancona,  by  the  terms  of 
the  Peace  of  Cremona,  1441.  The  Angevin  party  in  Naples  was 
extinct,  and  Alfonso  was  the  only  power  which  could  support 


KECOVEKY:  MAKTTN  V.  AND  EUGENIUS  TV.    259 

Eugenius  in  Rome  and  at  the  same  time  fight  for  him  against 
Sforza.  Sforza  was  now  the  Duke  of  Milan's  son-in-law.  but 
they  were  not  on  the  best  of  terms  with  each  other,  and  after  a 
few  operations  in  the  March,  the  sphere  of  war  passed  to  the  north. 
Sforza  found  the  March  too  small  for  his  ambitions,  and  allowed 
it  to  revert  to  Eugenius,  who  once  more  found  himself  master 
of  a  situation  which  he  had  done  nothing  to  bring  about. 

Meanwhile,  the  theological  reaction  against  the  Council  was  in 
full  swing.  Eugenius  could  issue  excommunications  with  greater 
effect  from  a  council  in  the  Lateran  than  he  could  from  Florence. 
But  the  greatest  victory  of  all  came  to  him  on  his  death-bed, 
through  the  efibrts  of  the  humanist  adventurer,  iEneas  Sylvius 
Piccofomini.  Eugenius  could  not  have  found  a  finer  instrument 
for  his  delicate  negotiations  with  Germany  than  this  valued 
Italian  secretary  of  the  Emperor.  Events  in  Hungary,  hitherto 
a  bone  of  contention,  opened  the  way  for  alliance  with  Frederick. 
The  Pope  and  the  Emperor  had  hitherto  supported  rival  claim- 
ants to  this  unfortunate  kingdom.  But  on  the  field  of  Varna, 
Vladislor  of  Hungary  died  fighting  against  the  Turks.  Vladislor 
was  the  de  facto  king  whom  Eugenius  had  upheld.  With  him 
died  Cardinal  Cesarini  with  characteristic  heroism  as  the  leader 
of  a  forlorn  hope.  Ladislas  Posthumous,  the  ward  of  Frederick 
III.,  was  now  the  sole  heir  of  Hungary,  and  Eugenius  was  ready 
to  support  him.  Frederick,  on  his  side,  sold  his  neutrality  for  a 
sum  of  money  and  a  life  interest  in  certain  bishoprics  and 
benefices  in  Germany.  A  harder  task  was  the  winning  of  the 
princes,  many  of  whom  were  pledged  to  the  support  of  Felix  V. 
But  the  "noble  deed"  of  ^Eneas  found  a  way.  An  embassy 
from  the  princes  offering  haughty  terms  was  supplemented  by  a 
secret  embassy  from  .Eneas,  coaching  the  Pope  in  the  part 
which  he  was  to  play.  Eugenius  sent  a  vague  and  conciliatory 
answer  instead  of  the  blank  refusal  which  might  have  been 
expected.  ^Eneas  proceeded,  meanwhile,  to  "squeeze  the 
venom  "  out  of  the  princes'  proposals,  making  vast  promises  to 
them  for  which  he  had  no  authority,  and  carrying  a  carefully 
edited  version  of  them  to  Rome. 

Eugenius  was  dying,  but  he  wanted  to  see  the  end.  He 
empowered  the  Cardinals  to  act  for  him,  and  consoled  himself 
for  his  concessions  by  a  secret  protest  in  writing,  which  said  that 
what  he  had  done  was  merely  to  "  allure  "  the  Germans  to  unity, 
and  was  not  to  be  considered  as  binding  by  his  successor.  In 
January,  1447,  the  restoration  of  German  obedience  was  pub- 
lished, and  Eugenius,  obstinate  to  the  last,  lingered  on  in  life, 
petulantly  refusing  extreme  unction  in  his  resolution  to  live. 


260  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY  ) 

I 
"What  wonder,"  exclaimed  Alfonso  of  Naples,  "that  the  Pope  ' 
who  has  warred  against  Sforza,  the  Colonna,  and  myself,  and  j 
all  Italy,  dares  to  fight  against  death  also?"  Time,  usually  the 
best  friend  of  Eugenius,  vanquished  him  at  last,  at  the  moment 
when  his  triumph  seemed  complete.  His  difficulties  had  been 
immense,  and  he  had  to  cope  with  them  in  two  spheres  at  once. 
His  fortunes  in  Italy  had  reflected  themselves  at  Basle,  and 
each  phase  of  the  ecclesiastical  quarrel  reacted  on  his  territorial 
policy.  He  was  only  the  passive  agent  of  his  success,  which  he 
owed  rather  to  the  impetuosity  of  his  enemies,  and  the  inherent 
stability  of  the  Papacy,  than  to  any  exertions  on  his  own  part. 
In  character  he  is  overshadowed  by  the  men  who  surround  him. 
He  represents  mediocrity  among  the  talents — the  commonplace 
in  an  age  of  distinction.  He  shows  the  suspicion  and  reserve  of 
a  man  among  his  intellectual  superiors.  And  indeed,  with 
Poggio  and  Valla  as  his  secretaries,  Bessarion  and  Isidore  among 
his  Cardinals,  and  the  keen  eyes  of  iEneas  Sylvius  on  his 
diplomacy,  there  was  some  excuse  for  the  misgivings  of  an 
ordinary  man.  Eugenius  could,  however,  give  his  confidence 
very  freely  to  a  few,  though  his  choice  of  intimates  was  some- 
times regrettable,  as  in  the  case  of  Vitelleschi  and  Scarampo. 
His  attitude  to  humanism  was  encouraging  but  not  enthusiastic. 
The  Council  of  Ferrara-Florence  had  given  great  stimulus  to 
the  movement,  and  many  of  the  scholars  who  came  over  in  the 
train  of  John  Palseologos  remained  as  the  masters  of  the  new 
learning.  Plethon  stayed  in  Florence  to  be  the  literary  adviser 
of  Cosimo  de  Medici.  Bessarion  and  Isidore  came  back  again 
to  join  the  Curia.  Intellect  ranked  higher  than  ever ;  the  chief 
lessons  which  ^neas  deduced  from  the  Council  of  Basle  were 
the  consummate  importance  of  humanism  and  the  ineS'ectiveness 
of  men  of  "  more  soul  than  eloquence  "  in  that  rather  pedantic 
assembly.  Greek  manuscripts  began  to  pour  into  Italy  with  the 
cultured  refugees,  who  fled  with  their  literary  treasures  before 
the  advancing  Turk. 

Eugenius  showed  some  enthusiasm  for  art,  but  his  intentions 
were  better  than  his  taste.  He  admired  the  beautiful  gates  of 
Donatello  which  he  had  known  so  well  in  Florence,  but  he 
employed  a  second-rate  artist,  Filarete,  to  carry  out  the  same 
idea  in  Rome.  The  iron  gates  of  St.  Peter's  are  not  altogether 
a  success,  but  they  remain  as  a  monument  to  the  goodwill  of 
Eugenius  IV.  He  is  more  to  be  congratulated  for  his  restoration 
of  the  Pantheon  and  for  his  Fra  Angelico  frescoes.  As  a  true 
Venetian  he  was  chiefly  in  his  element  when  he  was  planning 
gorgeous  ceremonies,  and  he  was  fortunate  in  the  opportunities 


RECOVERY :  MARTIN  V.  AND  EUGENIUS  IV.    261 

which  his  reign  afiforded  for  this  delightful  pursuit.  He  was 
fortunate  too  in  being  a  tall  good-looking  man,  who  could  play 
his  part  in  a  pageant  without  looking  ridiculous.  The  meeting 
with  John  Palffiologos  was  probably  the  happiest  day  of  his 
troubled  life,  and  one  is  glad  to  know  that  he  had  not  sufficient 
insight  to  gauge  the  hoUowness  of  the  splendour  of  this  occasion. 


CHAPTER  XXIII 
THE  RENAISSANCE  POPES,  a.d.  1447-1471 

IT  is  easy  to  sympathise  with  the  Cardinals  who  elected  the 
scholar-bishop  of  Bologna  to  the  Papacy  as  Nicolas  V. 
(1447-1455).  The  wars  of  Martin  V.  and  the  blunders  of 
Eugenius  IV.  had  produced  a  longing  for  peace  and  plain-sailing, 
and  of  these  things  the  temperament  of  Nicolas  was  a  guarantee. 
The  conclave  of  1447  met  under  ominous  conditions.  Alfonso 
of  Naples  was  encamped  with  his  army  on  the  hills  above  Rome, 
ready  to  influence  the  new  election  with  the  sword.  Only  the 
fear  of  him  stifled  a  dangerous  outbreak  of  democracy  under  the 
leadership  of  Porcaro,  the  Rienzi  of  the  fifteenth  century.  The 
election  was  entirely  unexpected.  The  crowd  had  expected  the 
election  of  Prosper©  Colonna,  but  "  he  who  goes  into  the  conclave 
a  Pope  comes  out  a  Cardinal,"  was  the  wise  reflection  of  iEneas 
Silvius.  There  was  great  rejoicing  at  the  election  of  the  gentle 
student  Pope :  his  aims  were  the  aspirations  of  his  subjects,  and 
his  tastes  were  shared  and  understood  by  the  best  of  his  con- 
temporaries. "We  intend  to  strengthen  the  bishops,"  he  an- 
nounced, "and  hope  to  maintain  our  own  power  most  surely  by 
not  usurping  that  of  others."  The  same  spirit  in  politics 
prompted  his  dealings  with  Germany  and  Italy. 

In  Germany  his  business  was  to  complete  the  formal  act  of 
union,  which  was  expressed  in  February,  1448,  in  the  Concordat 
of  Vienna.  The  terms  seem  to  be  so  complete  a  surrender  that 
we  are  inclined  to  wonder  how  Germany  was  induced  to  accept 
them.  The  explanation  lies  in  the  condition  of  the  country. 
Frederick  III.  could  not  stand  alone  against  the  princes :  he 
needed  the  papal  alliance  to  supply  him  with  outward  dignity 
and  an  apparent  moral  purpose.  The  Bishops  were  frankly 
bought  over,  with  a  grant  of  the  disputed  privilege  of  reserva- 
tions for  their  lifetime  only.  Such  a  peace  could  not  endure, 
but  it  served  its  immediate  purpose.  The  Concordat  of  Vienna 
and  the  Pragmatic  Sanction  of  Bourges  contain  the  fruits  of  the 
conciliar  movement.  The  results  were  dangerously  inadequate, 
for  the  Papacy  had  postponed  the  day  of  reckoning  until  the 

262 


THE  RENAISSANCE  POPES  263 

next  century,  when  Europe  was  to  accumulate  fresh  scores  to 

deepen  the  old.  -,  .      xt-     , 

The  abdication  of  Felix  V.  followed  the  Concordat.  Nicolas 
treated  his  harmless  rival  with  characteristic  consideration,  and 
the  way  was  made  as  easy  for  him  as  possible.  He  was  allowed 
to  keep  the  outward  honours  of  a  Pope  in  his  own  dommions, 
and  he  was  £riven  the  first  place  after  Nicolas  in  the  precedence 
of  Europe.  ^His  supporters  were  forgiven  and  confirmed  in  their 
offices.  The  anti-pope  had  nothing  to  complain  of,  and,  re- 
cognising this,  he  gave  no  further  trouble. 

Nicolas  carried  out  his  peace  policy  as  thoroughly  in  Italy 
as  elsewhere.     He  restored  the  Colonnesi  to  their  possessions 
and  the  Bentivogli  to  Bologna.     When,  in  1450,  Sforza  put  an 
end  to  the  democratic  disorders  in  Milan,  which  had  followed 
the  death  of  Filippo  Visconti,  Nicolas  accepted  him  as  Duke  ot 
Milan,  and  hailed  him  as  another  peacemaker.      To  his  most 
dangerous  enemy,  Porcaro,  Nicolas  was  injudiciously  mild.     He 
ought,  perhaps,  to  have  recognised  the  serious  character  which 
a  liberty  movement  invariably  took  among  the  inflammable 
Romans.     On  his  accession,  he  sent  Porcaro  into  honorary  exile 
as  Podesta  of  Anagni,  whence  he  returned  to  Rome  and  raised 
for  a  second  time  the  cry  of  independence.     He  was  still  allowed 
to  be  at  large,  but  he  was  sent  to  Bologna,  the  home  of  lawless- 
ness on  "  ticket-of-leave  ".     Here  he  formed  another  conspiracy 
to  seize  Nicolas  and  the  Cardinals  at  Mass,  to  abolish  papal 
government,  and  restore  the  Roman  Republic.     In  1452  Porcaro 
fled  to  Rome  to  join  his  nephew  with  three  hundred  soldiers  and 
to  carry  out  the  coup  d'etat.     But  his  escape  was  reported  to  the 
Pope  before  he  reached   Rome,  and   his   nephew's   army  had 
already  been  detected  by  the  police.     This  time  Nicolas  could 
not  afi"ord  to  be  lenient,  and  Porcaro's  execution  put  an  end  to 
the  worst  danger  the  Pope  had  to  face.     Like  Rienzi,  Porcaro 
can  be  interpreted  in  many  ways.     Some  of  his  contemporaries 
saw  in  him  "a  worthy  man  who  loved  his  country";   others 
looked  on  him  as  the  incarnation  of  sedition.     He  is  probably 
most  fairly  explained  as  a  literary  dreamer  with  a  turn  tor 
practical  afl-airs.    His  plot  was  ill-conceived  and  unluckily  timed. 
The  democratic  cause  was  always  popular  in   Rome,  and  the 
fifteenth  century  was  likely  to  give  it  special  welcome  because 
humanism   pointed  naturally  to  democracy,  and   Rienzi   had 
already  made  the  two  movements  one.     But  it  was  unfortunate 
for  Porcaro  that  the  Pope  whom  he  sought  to  overthrow  should 
be  beloved  of  every  humanist  in  Rome,  himself  a  man  of  letters, 
and  not  without  sympathy  for  Roman  freedom  as  far  as  it  was 


^64  A  SHOET  HISTOBY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

compatible  with  papal  government.  The  popularity  of  Nicolas  V. 
among  those  who  would  otherwise  have  sympathised  with  Porcaro 
robbed  the  conspiracy  of  all  possibility  of  success.  Twelve  years 
later  he  might  have  had  a  better  chance. 

In  1450  Nicolas  V.  held  a  jubilee  in  Rome  which  brought  in 
an  immense  amount  of  money,  all  of  which  was  spent  in  beauti- 
fying the  city.  Two  hundred  pilgrims  were  killed  in  a  crush  on 
the  bridge  of  St.  Angelo,  and  the  Pope  therefore  had  the  bridge 
widened  and  built  an  exquisite  memorial  chapel  to  the  victims. 
The  jubilee  was  interrupted  by  the  plague,  and  hardly  had  the 
consternation  died  away  before  the  news  of  an  approaching  visit 
of  Frederick  III.  began  to  cause  something  like  a  general  panic. 
But  the  Italians  need  not  have  feared  the  coming  of  the  power- 
less Emperor.  A  prince  who  could  not  hold  his  own  in  Germany 
was  not  likely  to  succeed  in  making  good  the  Imperial  claims  in 
Italy.  Frederick's  behaviour  soon  persuaded  Italy  and  Nicolas 
that  he  meant  no  harm,  and  the  cities  expressed  their  relief  in 
magnificent  pageants  of  welcome,  ^neas  Silvius  enjoys  telling 
us  of  the  splendid  meeting  between  Frederick  and  his  child-bride 
Leonora  of  Naples  at  Siena,  in  which  he  himself  played  so  impor- 
tant a  part.  The  wedding  and  the  coronation  of  the  Emperor 
in  Rome  was  as  glorious  as  empty  magnificence  could  make  it. 
But  politically  Frederick's  visit  had  not  the  slightest  importance. 
At  Florence  he  negotiated  with  Sforza,  who  sought  investiture, 
but  when  Frederick  tried  to  turn  it  to  profit  by  seeking  tribute, 
Sforza  showed  what  he  thought  of  the  beggar-Emperor  by  re- 
fusing the  privilege  unless  he  could  get  it  for  nothing.  Poverty 
in  a  prince  was  an  unforgivable  sin  in  Italy  of  the  fifteenth 
century,  and  Frederick's  attempt  to  mediate  between  Venice  and 
Florence  was  treated  with  contempt  on  this  account. 

In  1453  the  disaster  fell  which  darkened  the  pontificate  of 
Nicolas  v.,  and  turned  the  sunlight  of  his  peace  to  gloom. 
Repeated  appeals  of  the  Eastern  Emperor  for  help  against  the 
Turks  had  been  ignored  or  inadequately  answered.  Now  the 
news  came  that  Constantinople  had  fallen.  Nicolas  was  not 
to  blame  as  much  as  many  of  his  contemporaries :  he  had  sent 
an  expedition  in  1452,  and  he  had  done  what  he  could  to  stir 
the  princes  of  Europe.  But  he  felt  it  as  a  personal  blow,  and 
iEneas  Silvius,  writing  in  the  spirit  of  Job's  comforter,  expressed 
the  feeling  of  which  Nicolas  was  all  too  conscious :  "  Historians 
of  the  Roman  pontifi's,  when  they  reach  your  time,  will  write : 
'  Nicholas  V.,  a  Tuscan,  was  Pope  for  so  many  years.  He 
recovered  the  patrimony  of  the  Church  from  the  hands  of 
tyrants ;  he  gave  union  to  the  divided  Church ;   he  canonised 


THE  RENAISSANCE  POPES  265 

Bernardino  of  Siena;  he  built  the  Vatican  and  splendidly 
restored  St.  Peter's;  he  celebrated  the  Jubilee,  and  crowned 
Frederick  III.'  All  this  will  be  glorious  to  your  fame,  but  will 
be  obscured  by  the  doleful  addition :  '  In  his  time  Constantmople 
was  taken  and  plundered  (or  it  may  be  burned  and  razed)  by  the 
Turks  '     Your  Holiness  did  what  you  could,  and  no  blame 

can  justly  attach  to  you.  Yet  the  ignorance  of  posterity  will 
blame  you  when  it  hears  that  in  your  time  Constantmople  was 
lost "  iEneas  was  right  as  to  the  importance  which  posterity 
would  attach  to  the  event,  but  he  could  not  foresee  in  what  way 
it  would  be  regarded  as  a  milestone  in  history.  The  immediate 
effect  of  the  catastrophe  on  the  Papacy  was  to  create  a  sudden 
diversion  of  political  energy.  It  opens  an  epoch  in  which  the 
test  of  a  Pope's  statesmanship  was  his  zeal  for  the  Crusade. 
Nicolas  V.  responded  as  readily  as  he  could  to  the  demands  of 
the  crisis.  He  preached  the  Crusade  with  scholarly  eloquence, 
and  sent  his  envoys  to  exhort  the  princes  of  Europe  to  set  aside 
their  mutual  quarrels  and  to  unite  against  the  enemy  of  religion. 
He  welcomed  the  peace  of  Lodi  in  1454  as  the  first  step  to- 
wards an  Italian  expedition,  but  Italy  showed  no  inclination  to 
take  the  lead,  and  the  attitude  of  Europe  was  discouraging. 
Frederick  III.  and  the  German  princes  were  wordily  sympathetic, 
and  used  the  crusading  diets  to  advance  their  own  interests. 
They  ridiculed  the  zeal  of  Philip  of  Burgundy,  the  only  genuine 
crusader  among  the  host  of  plausible  lion- hearts,  who  protested 
everything  and  committed  themselves  to  nothing. 

The  failure  of  Nicolas  to  rouse  Europe  against  the  Tm-ks  is 
easily  explained.  As  a  religious  ideal  the  crusading  spirit  was 
dead  :  poUtically,  it  had  been  replaced  by  the  spirit  of  nationality 
in  England  and  France,  and  in  Germany  and  Italy  by  the 
particularist  interests  of  princes  and  cities.  /Eneas  Silvius, 
whose  political  psychology  is  always  brilliant,  thus  expressed 
his  impression  of  crusading  Councils  in  Germany :  "  We  look  on 
Pope  and  Emperor  alike  as  names  in  a  story  or  heads  in  a 
picture.  Each  state  has  its  own  king:  there  are  as  many 
princes  as  there  are  houses.  How  will  you  persuade  this  mul- 
titude of  rulers  to  take  up  arms  ?  "  Nothing  but  passionate 
conviction  could  supply  the  necessary  persuasion,  and  Nicolas 
himself  was  conscientious  rather  than  enthusiastic  in  his 
crusading  policy.  For  he  was  a  man  whose  dominant  idea 
really  excluded  all  others,  and  he  had  given  himself  with  intense 
self-devotion  to  the  adornment  of  Rome  and  the  revival  of 
learning.  Books  and  pictures  meant  far  more  to  him  than 
soldiers  or  cities,  for  "to  create  solid  and  stable  convictions  in 


266  A  SHOKT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

the  minds  of  the  uncultured  masses  there  must  be  something 
that  appeals  to  the  eye:  a  popular  faith  sustained  only  by 
doctrines  Avill  never  be  anything  but  feeble  and  vacillating. 
But  if  the  authority  of  the  Holy  See  were  visibly  displayed  in 
majestic  buildings,  imperishable  memorials,  and  witnesses  seem- 
ingly planted  by  the  hand  of  God  Himself,  belief  would  grow 
and  strengthen  like  a  tradition  from  one  generation  to  another, 
and  all  the  world  would  accept  and  revere  it."  In  these  words 
Nicolas  V.  expressed  the  ideal  of  his  pontificate :  in  its  fulfil- 
ment we  find  the  reflection  both  of  his  age  and  of  his 
individuality.  We  see  him  as  the  friend  of  Cosimo  de  Medici, 
the  lover  of  exquisite  manuscripts,  the  patron  of  an  "  army"  of 
artists  and  builders,  and  the  director  of  artistic  and  literary 
toil.  He  saw  Rome  as  a  mine  of  hidden  beauty  vvhich  it  was 
his  dream  to  bring  to  light.  It  remained  at  his  death  a  dream 
unfulfilled,  for  his  plans  were  too  vast  for  one  Pope  to  accomplish, 
and  the  gift  of  Renaissance  beauty  to  Rome  grew  sinister  in  the 
eyes  of  Europe  when  Constantine's  city  fell  into  the  hands  of 
Mahomet. 

Nicolas  tried  to  carry  out  too  much.  He  planned  and 
began  the  rebuilding  of  St.  Peter's  on  the  lines  afterwards  carried 
out  by  Julius  II.  He  rebuilt  most  of  the  Capitol,  and  the  city 
walls.  He  began  the  fountain  of  Trevi,  and  reorganised  the 
water-supply.  In  the  Vatican  he  built  the  Cortile  del  Belvidere 
and  the  library.  This  was  not  the  end  of  his  plan,  but  his  work 
as  a  whole  is  sadly  incomplete,  and  it  suff'ered,  as  the  artistic 
plans  of  the  Popes  always  did,  from  the  lack  of  continuity  in 
papal  history.  Nicolas  was  succeeded  by  a  "Philistine"  Pope, 
and  his  schemes  had  to  wait  a  long  time  for  a  worthy  successor. 
To  literature  he  gave  still  greater  enthusiasm  ;  the  eight  years  of 
his  pontificate  gave  the  banner  of  humanism  to  the  Popes,  and 
committed  them  to  the  Renaissance  as  irrevocably  as  Germany 
had  already  bound  itself  to  the  cause  of  Reformation.  The 
scholars  and  artists  of  Nicolas  were  an  army  to  fight  the 
Councils :  the  cry  for  reform  was  to  be  met  with  a  display  of 
culture ;  Teutonic  stolidity  was  to  be  opposed  by  Italian  civilta, 
and  the  long-winded  theology  of  the  opponents  of  the  Papacy 
was  to  be  answered  by  the  nimble  wit  of  classical  scholars. 
Nicolas  knew  that  a  patron  who  wants  good  work  must  be 
tolerant  of  artistic  weaknesses,  and  not  too  rigid  a  censor  of 
conduct.  Among  his  scholars  were  men  as  notorious  as  they 
were  distinguished.  The  coarse  jokes  of  Poggio  did  not  debar 
him  from  favour  in  the  Cm'ia,  and  Valla's  brilliant  intellect  was 
a  passport  for  his   atheism.     The  quarrel  between  Poggio  and 


THE  RENAISSANCE  POPES  267 

Valla  was  an  exercise  in  literary  scun-ility,  but  Nicolas  turned 
a  deaf  ear  to  it,  and  kept  them  both  in  his  service.  Nothing  but 
a  I'lck  of  skill  could  alienate  the  favour  of  the  scholar-Pope:  he 
could  forgive  the  obscenity  of  Valla,  but  not  the  inaccuracy  of 
George  of  Trapezus.  He  sent  his  learned  men  all  over  Europe 
in  search  of  manuscripts,  and  financed  scholarship  on  a  scale 
equal  to  his  appreciation.  When  he  died  in  March,  14oo,  he  was 
lamented  with  good  reason  by  the  crowd  of  scholars,  among 
them  a  large  proportion  of  refugee  Greeks  from  Constantinople, 
who  were  dependent  on  his  bounty. 

Alfonso  Borda.   the   old   Spanish   Cardinal  who  succeeded 
Nicolas   as  Calixtus  HI.   (1455-1458),  made  short  work  ot  the 
scholars      He  shared  the  resentment  of  the  uncultured  many 
at  the  artistic  expenditure  of  Nicolas  at  a  time  when  money  was 
urgently  needed  for  the  Crusade.     Calixtus  inherited  the  heredi- 
tanr  Spanish  hatred  of  the  Moslems,  and  he  concentrated  the 
feverish  energy  of  old  age  on  two  objects,  the  Crusade  and  the 
aggrandisement  of  his  nephews.      The  year  appointed  for  the 
Crusade  opened  a  few  months  after  Cahxtus  HI.'s  accession  but 
the   news   that  reached   Rome  was  not  encouraging,  and  the 
apathy  of  Europe  stood  revealed.      In  most  cases  the  torces 
raised   for  the   Crusade   were   being  used   for  other  purposes 
Alfonso  of  Naples  had  built  a  fleet,  but  he  was  using  it  against 
Genoa.     Charles  VH.  of  France  was  spending  the  Tenth  raised 
for  the  Crusade  in  a  war  against  Naples.     Meanwhile,  the  papal 
fleet  under  Cardinal  Scarampo  was  putting  away  time  in  winning 
small  victories  on  unimportant  islands.     The  relief  of  Belgrad 
by  Hunyadi  and  Capistrano  was  the  only  relief,  and  even  these 
tidings  were  accompanied  by  dismal  accounts  ot  the  hostility  to 
the  Papacy  in  Germany,     ^neas  Silvius,  with  all  his  diplomatic 
skill,  and  his  genius  for  cajolery,  could  not  break  the  tide  ot 
German  opposition.      Martin  Mayr  and  his  patron,  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Mainz,  expressed  the  grievances  of  Germany   in   a 
letter  of  congratulation  to  yEneas,  when,  in  1457,  Calixtus  forced 
open  the  door  of  the  Cardinalate,  as  ^neas  expresses  it,  on  his 
behalf       The   answer  to   German   opposition   is  found   in  the 
"  Germania  "  of  ^neas,  and  in  the  benefits  bestowed  by  Calixtus 
on  the  Archbishop  of  Mainz.     But  there  was  a  spirit  behind  the 
events  which  could  not  be  defeated  by  words  or  gifts,  and  the 
pontificate  of  Calixtus  contributed  to  the  growing  conflict  be- 
tween the  soul  of  Italy  and  the  soul  of  Germany. 

Meanwhile,  the  name  of  Borgia  was  already  beginning  to  col- 
lect the  antipathies  of  Princes  and  Cardinals  in  Italy.  Calixtus 
had  already  created  as  Cardinals  two  good-looking  young  nephews 


268  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 


\ 


who  had  nothing  to  recommend  them  but  their  youth  and  high 
spirits.  He  now  embarked  on  a  quarrel  with  Naples  for  the 
benefit  of  a  third.  He  refused  to  recognise  the  bastard  son  of 
Alfonso  as  heir  to  the  kingdom,  claiming  it  as  a  fief  of  the 
Church,  and  establishing  his  nephew,  Don  Pedro  Luis,  in  two 
Neapolitan  duchies.  Meanwhile,  Rodrigo  Borgia  and  his  brother 
exercised  an  informal  tyranny  in  Rome,  and  caused  the  ostra- 
cism of  all  the  Cardinals  who  were  likely  to  interfere  with  them. 
Scarampo  was  kept  at  sea;  Carrajal  and  Nicolas  of  Cusa  were 
sent  to  Germany,  while  the  saintly  Capranica  was  deprived  of 
power.  The  effect  of  the  Pope's  nephews  was  to  rob  their  uncle 
of  his  reputation.  Calixtus  was  a  harmless  old  man  with  an 
exaggerated  weakness  for  his  own  family,  and  an  unbounded 
enthusiasm  for  the  Crusade.  When  he  died  in  August,  1458,  the 
only  "objet  d'art"  mentioned  in  the  inventory  of  his  bedroom 
furniture  was  a  copy  of  his  crusading  vow  elaborately  framed. 
And  yet  he  is  better  known  to  history  as  the  uncle  of  Rodrigo, 
and  the  founder  of  a  family  connection  which  brought  the 
Papacy  to  its  lowest  depth  of  moral  infamy. 

Calixtus  was  succeeded  by  ^Eneas  Silvius  Piccolomini.  With 
his  accession  the  Renaissance  comes  into  its  own.  Nicolas  V. 
had  patronised  the  humanists,  Calixtus  III.  had  been  a  target  for 
their  criticism  :  in  Pius  H.  (1458-1464),  they  hailed  one  of  them- 
selves. But"  they  were  doomed  to  disappointment,  for  it  im- 
mediately appeared  that  the  pontificate  of  Pius  II.  was  not  to  be 
interpreted  in  the  light  of  the  career  of  iEneas  Silvius  Piccolomini. 
^neas  had  already  been  at  work  for  some  years  uprooting  the 
wild  oats  which  he  had  sown  in  his  youth  as  secretary  at  the 
Council  of  Basle,  and  as  envoy  at  the  German  court.  And  yet  his 
reputation  and  his  character  made  it  difficult  for  his  denuncia- 
tion of  his  early  exploits  to  seem  sincere.  He  could  not  help 
giving  dramatic  expression  even  to  his  deepest  convictions,  and 
his  contemporaries,  recognising  the  artist,  suspected  artifice. 
When  he  urged  them  to  "  accept  Pius,  and  reject  ^neas,"  they 
made  a  mental  reservation  of  the  novels  of  iEneas — still  popular 
in  circles  which  Pius  was  pledged  to  condemn.  They  recalled 
the  love-letters  which  ^Eneas  had  written  for  young  Sigismund  of 
Tyrol,  and  found  them  out  of  keeping  with  the  tone  of  the  papal 
Bulls  of  Pius.  They  whispered  rumours  of  his  personal  indiscre- 
tions, and  contrasted  them  with  the  high  standard  which  he 
demanded  of  his  Cardinals.  All  this  was  extremely  unfair,  but 
it  is  the  usual  tone  applied  by  criticism  to  those  whose  characters 
are  plastic  and  easily  moulded  by  circumstances.  Pius  was  pro- 
bably quite  as  much  in  earnest  preaching  reform  at  Basle  as  at 


THE  EENAISSANCE  POPES  2G9 

Mantua,  pronouncing  the  Bull  "  Execrabilis."  but  it  was  hard  for 
more  rigid  intellects  to  accept  the  possibility  of  so  complete  a 
change  of  front.  Hence  the  interest  of  his  pontificate  is  not  to 
be  found  in  the  intrinsic  importance  of  its  events,  but  in  the 
degree  in  which  they  impressed  themselves  on  the  mmd  of  the 
Pope,  and  in  the  form  which  they  assumed  when  he  gave  them 

expression.  f  4.u„ 

The   first  of  these   influences   was   the    conception   ot   the 
Papacy  itself      As  soon  as  he  had  achieved  his  election,  the 
brilliant  traditions  of  his  office  possessed  his  imagination  ;  his 
poet's   sense   of  the   oneness  of  the  past  and  present  brought 
back  to  life  the  forgotten  dreams  of  a  world-wide  spiritual  do- 
minion   and  gave  him  for  its  concrete  expression  the  ideal  of 
the  Crusade     We  seem  to  watch  the  deepening  of  the  impres- 
sion as  he  journeyed  through  Italy,  on  his  way  to  the  Congress 
of  Mantua,  which  had  been  summoned  for  1459.     He  hked  to 
be  splendidly  received,  although  his  tastes  were  all  for  simplicity 
and  gentle  quiet,  because  he  had  a  great  sense  of  the  dignity  of 
his  mission.     In  the  same  spirit  he  made  peace  with  Ferrante 
of  Naples :  he  did  not  want  to  be  worried  with  an  Italian  war 
until  the  great  enterprise  was  launched,  and  yet  he  managed  to 
leave  a  loophole  in  his  agreement  with  Ferrante  to  enable  him 
to  revert  to  the  French  policy  in  Naples  if  occasion  demanded  it. 
His  progress  through  Italy  was  not  a  mere  pageant :   it  had  a 
deep  political  importance  as  well,  and  every  city  which  received 
him  took  its  place  in  his  mind  with  permanent  results.     With 
his  own  town  of  Siena  there  had  been  difficulties,  but  they  sub- 
sided when  he  was  there  in  person,   and  for  two  months  he 
stayed  among  his  own  people,  whose  welcome  meant  more  to 
him  than  all  Italy.    While  he  was  enjoying  the  homage  of  his 
Alma  Mater— all  the  sweeter  because  he  had  once  been  regarded 
as  an  indiscreet  son-he  made  the  plan  for  the  beautifying  of 
his  little  native  village  of  Corsignano,  which  was  to  be  his  best 
contribution  to  the  Renaissance  of  architecture.     Corsignano, 
transformed  into  Pienza  in  honour  of  the  Piccolomini,  is  a  perfect 
example  of  the  simplicity  of  Italian  building  in  the  transition 
from  Gothic  to  Classical  style.     It  is  also  full  of  the  character  of 
Pius  himself,  with  its  wide  open  views  of  Italian  landscape  its 
perfect  command  of  detail  and  use  of  restraint,  and  its  complete 
fulfilment  of  the  desired  effect.  . 

From  Siena  Pius  went  to  Florence,  where  he  was  received 
with  honour,  although  Cosimo  de  Medici  diplomatically  stayed 
in  bed  At  stormy  Bologna  he  was  uncomfortable,  for  the  town 
was  nearly  in  rebellion,  and  Pius  had  to  enter  it  between  two 


270  A  SHOKT  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

lines  of  Milanese  troops.  But  at  Ferrara  Borso  d'Este  received 
him  with  open  arms ;  from  Ferrara  to  Mantua  he  sailed  up  the 
Po  in  a  forest  of  splendid  ships,  and  his  entry  to  Mantua  was  as 
glorious  as  the  Marquis  Gonzaga  could  make  it.  Here  Sforza's 
wife  and  children  visited  him,  and  little  Ippolita  Sforza 
charmed  him  with  her  Latin  speech  of  welcome.  Then  the 
envoys  of  the  Council  began  to  arrive— not  nearly  fast  enough 
or  many  enough  to  satisfy  Pius,  and  before  many  days  he  be- 
gan to  discover  the  deplorable  truth  that  he  himself  was  the 
only  whole-hearted  crusader  there.  The  Emperor's  envoys  were 
inadequate,  the  Cardinals  complained  of  discomfort,  the  Princes 
were  full  of  their  own  quarrels,  and  the  Italians  cared  more  for 
the  peace  of  Italy  than  for  anything  else.  All  the  genius  and 
conviction  of  Pius  spent  itself  in  his  great  crusading  sermon, 
which  was  a  masterpiece  of  persuasive  prose.  He  recalled  the 
great  crusades  of  the  Congress  of  Clermont,  and  the  magnificent 
enthusiasm  of  Europe  when,  with  one  voice,  it  shouted  "Dieu  le 
veult!".  All  that  could  be  done  with  such  material  Pius 
managed  to  do,  but  the  Congress  showed  no  disposition  to  sink 
differences  and  antipathies  in  the  common  cause.  Heimburg, 
the  personal  enemy  of  Pius,  was  there  to  neutralise  his  appeal 
with  the  repetition  of  personal  scandals,  and  the  Germans  were 
all  too  ready  to  listen  to  him.  France  flaunted  the  Pragmatic 
Sanction,  and  quarrelled  with  the  Pope's  alliance  with  Ferrante. 
Sforza  cared  only  for  Italian  peace  and  the  exclusion  of 
foreigners,  especially  the  French.  Florence  was  jealous  of 
Venice,  who  was  likely  to  be  the  chief  gainer  in  the  crusading 
enterprise,  and  Cosimo  was  further  influenced  by  loyalty  to  the 
French  cause  in  Naples.  In  all  the  grievances  one  common  note 
is  traceable,  which  is  a  vague  distrust  of  Pius,  a  tendency  to  ask 
what  he  was  getting  out  of  it  all,  to  resent  his  phrases  and  his 
rhetoric,  and  to  question  his  political  sincerity.  In  spite  of  this, 
Pius  managed  to  collect  a  larger  Crusade  than  might  have  been 
expected,  though  it  was  far  less  than  he  demanded,  and  too 
small  to  be  in  any  sense  adequate. 

Before  he  left  Mantua  in  1460,  Pius  published  the  Bull 
"  Execrabilis,"  in  which  the  practice,  common  among  refractory 
princes,  of  appealing  to  a  future  General  Council  was  denounced 
as  "  an  execrable  abuse,  unknown  to  early  times ".  This  was 
the  rebuke  of  Pius  to  the  selfishness  of  the  national  churches, 
which  he  condemned  as  the  chief  cause  of  the  lack  of  crusading 
ardour.  The  councils  were  responsible  for  this  selfishness,  and 
Pius  was  consciously  destroying  the  results  of  the  conciliar 
movement.     As  the  author  of  the  Bull  "  Execrabilis,"  he  stood 


THE  EENAISSANCE  POPES  271 

before  the  world  as  the  exponent  of  the  old-fashioned  Hilde- 
brandine  ideal.  His  new  role  was  not  a  popular  one,  and  it  lent 
itself  to  further  charges  of  insincerity,  for,  as  a  young  man, 
JEneas  had  made  his  name  as  the  disciple  of  Caspar  Schlick, 
the  famous  anti-papal  Chancellor  of  Frederick  IT.  Since  the 
days  of  the  Council  of  Basle,  iEneas  had  honestly  changed  his 
mind,  but,  unfortunately,  his  reputation  would  not  bear  the 
strain  of  the  demand  made  upon  it,  and  the  Bull  became  a  use- 
ful tool  in  the  hands  of  his  enemiee. 

When  Pius  left  Mantua  in  1460  he  had  learnt  more  about 
Italy  and  about  his  own  position  than  when  he  had  set  out.     In 
the  quiet  Umbrian  country-side  which  he  loved,  he  pondered 
over  these  things  until  the  autumn  brought  tidings  of  riot  from 
Rome,  and  recalled  him  to  face  the  inevitable  crisis  which  recurs 
like  a  refrain  throughout  papal  history.     Porcaro's  rebellion  had 
left  an  aftermath  of  discontent  which  Pius  had  to  reap  in  the 
riots  of  one  Tiburzio.     But  the  circumstances  of  1460  were  lacking 
in  dignity  and  importance,  and  Pius  had  no  difficulty  in  restoring 
order   after   a   few  executions.      His   ItaUan   policy,  always   a 
secondary  consideration  to  him,  henceforth  centred  in  Naples. 
His  worst  enemies  were  the  condottieri  who  openly  bid  for  war 
at  any  price,  and  entered  into  mutual  agreements  to  oppose  the 
crusading  peace  which  was  the  object  of  the  Pope.     "  Who  wants 
peace?"  wrote  Picinino  to  his  opponent  Sforza,  in  1463— "  No 
one,  save   priests  and  merchants,  the  Roman  Curia,  and  the 
traders  of  Venice  and  Florence.    ...    In  peace,  we  are  despised 
and  sent  to  the  plough;   in  war,  we  become  mighty  and  may 
follow  the  example  of  Francesco  Sforza,  who  has  raised  himself 
to  a  dukedom."     We  can  imagine  the  disdain  which  was  felt 
by  these  great  masters  of  the  fine  art  of  war  for  the  amateur 
army  of  dilettante  crusaders,  which  was  all  that  Europe  had  to 
offer  against  the  Turks.     Under  these  conditions  the  peace  of 
Pius  was  dearly   bought.     He   might  plead— "We  fought   for 
Christ  when  we  defended  Ferrante ;  we  warred  against  the  Turks 
when  we  smote  the  lands  of  Malatesta,"  but  the  argument  did 
not  carry  conviction  to  his  critics,  who  noticed  that  the  war  in 
Naples  brought  fiefs  to  the  Piccolomini,  and  saw  in  the  struggle 
with  Sigismondo  Malatesta  the  expression  of  vindictive  personal 
hostility. 

The  policy  of  Pius  in  Naples  involved  him  in  trouble  with 
France.  With  the  accession  of  Louis  XI.  in  1461,  Pius  hoped 
that  the  aggressive  attitude  assumed  by  France  at  the  Congress 
of  Mantua  would  cease,  for  Louis  as  Dauphin  had  recognised 
that  the  danger  to   the  French  monarchy    was   greater   when 


272  A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

Church  privileges  were  exercised  by  the  nobility  than  when  they 
were  left  in  the  hands  of  the  Pope.  At  first  his  hopes  seemed 
likely  to  be  fulfilled :  the  Pragmatic  Sanction  was  abolished, 
and  the  warmest  courtesies  were  exchanged  between  Paris  and 
Kome.  But  the  question  of  Naples  gradually  broke  through  the 
harmony  with  insistent  discord.  Louis  declared  himself  the 
champion  of  R6n6  of  Anjou,  and  Pius,  concealing  the  extent  to 
which  he  was  committed  to  Ferrante,  replied  to  Louis's  envoys 
with  "many  words  but  no  good  deeds".  An  open  quarrel 
soon  followed,  the  French  Cardinals  were  recalled  to  Paris,  and 
Pius,  seeing  in  France  the  lost  recruiting-ground  of  the  best 
crusaders,  gave  rein  to  his  passionate  resentment.  The  restora- 
tion of  Galilean  liberties  followed  his  explosion  of  wrath,  and 
Louis  is  henceforth  to  be  counted  among  his  enemies. 

France  was  not  the  only  obstacle  to  the  Catholic  peace  of 
Europe.  George  Podiebrad  of  Bohemia  had  failed  in  his  attempt 
to  serve  two  masters.  In  1460  he  had  made  peace  with  Pius, 
leaving  his  creed  vaguely  expressed  in  order  to  satisfy  his 
Hussite  subjects.  In  the  dourse  of  two  years  his  position  be- 
came impossible,  and  a  Hussite  conference  in  Rome  created  a 
definite  breach  between  Pius  and  George.  George  Podiebrad 
was  as  good  a  diplomatist  as  Pius,  and  in  the  end  he  outwitted 
him.  He  became  the  agent  of  the  anti-papal  party,  and  the 
patron  of  a  fantastic  scheme  for  a  secular  Crusade  by  which 
he  was  to  become  King  of  Constantinople,  supported  by  the 
combined  forces  of  the  enemies  of  Pius.  It  is  not  to  be  wondered 
at  that  a  scheme  so  purely  negative  for  every  one  except  George 
failed  to  win  many  supporters,  and  the  rival  Crusade  never 
became  a  serious  source  of  anxiety  to  Pius. 

In  his  dealings  with  Germany,  Pius  was  no  more  fortunate. 
Unlike  Martin  V.  he  had  no  talent  for  reaping  the  advantages 
of  the  misfortunes  of  others.  Germany  was  in  a  deplorable  state 
of  purposeless  disunion.  Pius  was  drawn  to  Frederick  III.  in 
common  opposition  to  territorialism,  and  the  "only  chance  for 
their  cause  lay  in  the  lack  of  cohesion  among  their  enemies. 
"Be  of  good  cheer,"  he  wrote  to  the  disconsolate  Emperor,  "it 
is  difficult  to  overthrow  the  Apostolic  See  and  the  Roman  Empire 
at  the  same  time.  Their  roots  are  planted  too  deep  for  the  wind 
to  prevail  against  them,  although  we  who  are  poised  on  their 
summit  must  expect  to  feel  the  blast."  All  through  his  pontifi- 
cate Pius  "felt  the  blast"  with  inconvenient  severity,  but  his 
generalisation  held  good.  The  gale  blew  strongest  from  Austria, 
where  the  origin  of  his  troubles  was  a  quarrel  between  Duke 
Sigismund  and  Nicolas  of  Cusa.     Pius  was  drawn  into  it  when 


THE  RENAISSANCE  POPES  273 

Nicolas  appealed  to  him,  and  his  intervention  brought  Heim- 
burg  forward  once  more.     Whenever  Pius  and  Heimburg  are 
face  to  face,  the  personal  motif  predominates.     Ever  since  Pius 
had  laughed  at  the  heated  German  sincerity  of  his  rival  envoy 
at  the  court  of  Eugenius,  Heinburg  had  never  lost  an  oppor- 
tunity of  winning  the  scores  of  the  plain  blunt  man  over  the 
orator.      When   Sigismund  defied   "  Execrabilis "   in   1461    and 
appealed  to   a   General   Council,  the  excommunication  which 
followed  was  parried  by  Heimburg  in  a  counter-attack  on  the 
character  of  Pius.     "  Let  him  consider  his  own  past  life,"  is  the 
burden  of  the  Austrian  apologia.     Some  of  the  shafts  of  Heim- 
burg got  home  in  spite  of  his  raucous  abusiveness.     Pius  had 
been  trying  ever  since  he  became  Pope  to  subdue  in  himself  his 
love   of  poetry  and  classical  literature.     Nothing  moved  him 
more  than  Heimburg's  references  to  "  the  tropical  orator,"  who 
will  only  see  straight  "  when  his  fit  of  wind  is  over  .  .  .  when 
he  has  sent  away  the  Muses  and  has  turned  to  the  Canon  Law  ". 
The  Muses  had  been  banished  with  the  other  undesirable  com- 
panions of  the  youth  of  iEneas  Silvius,  but  their  phantoms  still 
haunted  the  middle-aged  Pope,  and  to  such  as  Heimburg  he 
was  still  the  subtle  phrase-monger  who  had  talked  truth  into 
falsehood  and  outwitted  the  Germans  as  the  go-between  of  the 
Empire  and  the  Papacy.     As  a  matter  of  fact,  Heimburg  had 
overreached    himself:     his    extravagant    language   had   left   a 
loophole  for  internal  discord,  and  the  quarrel  between  Pius  and 
Sigismund   remained  a  personal  one,  in  spite  of  his  efforts  to 
give  it  a  wider  setting.     This  personal  character  of  the  troubles 
of  Pius  II.  is  a  feature  of  his  pontificate.     His  second  great 
German  quarrel  with  the  Archbishop  of  Mainz  was  of  the  same 
natiue,  and  in  both  cases  the  dispute  only  became  dangerous 
when  it  was  joined  to  something  like  a  political  movement. 
Heimburg   and   Diether   of  Mainz  were  individually  defeated 
without  much  difficulty,  but  the  movement  to  depose  Frederick 
and  arraign  Pius  before  a  General  Council  might  have  become 
serious  if  Pius  had  not  created  a  diversion  by  the  deposition  of 
the  rebel  Archbishop.     In  1464  a  formal  peace  was  made  be- 
tween Sigismund  and  Pius,  but  it  was  too  late  to  be  of  any  use 
to  Christendom.     Germany  had  already  made  its  great  refusal, 
and  the  fate  of  the  Crusade  was  sealed. 

Pius  was  hampered  in  Germany  by  the  expert  knowledge  of 
the  situation  which  he  had  acquired  as  an  official  of  Frederick's 
court.  In  his  policy  he  wavered  between  the  claims  of  a  spirit- 
ual overlord  and  the  attitude  of  a  foreign  prince.  Hence  he  could 
neither  defeat  the  opposition  in  open  attack,  nor  make  good  his 
18 


274  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

right  to  override  it.  The  source  of  all  his  troubles  lay  in  the 
personal  bias  with  which  he  was  credited ;  he  "  approached 
German  politics  as  a  partisan  where  he  should  have  appeared 
as  an  arbiter".  He  was  under  the  impression  that  he  was 
taking  a  short  cut  to  a  peace  which  would  at  least  facilitate  the 
Crusade.  For  the  European  policy  of  Pius  II.  must  always  be 
regarded  as  a  prelude  to  his  last  great  effort.  His  faihire  to 
convince  Europe  of  his  sincerity  in  the  enterprise  for  which  he 
was  prepared  to  die,  amounts  to  a  tragedy.  His  contemporaries, 
it  must  be  admitted,  had  their  justification.  His  quaint  attempt 
to  convert  the  Sultan,  by  a  long  polemical  pamphlet  in  his  best 
literary  style,  looked  very  like  playing  with  the  situation.  It 
was,  in  fact,  a  naive  expression  of  the  humanist's  blind  faith  in 
the  power  of  reason.  His  policy  in  Naples  seemed  to  be  framed 
with  a  view  to  enriching  his  own  family  :  the  Piccolomini  fiefs 
were,  however,  a  wedge  driven  into  the  heart  of  Naples  as  a 
guarantee  for  the  galleys  of  Ferrante.  "  Whatever  we  do  is  con- 
strued for  the  worse,"  Pius  wrote  in  pathetic  enlightenment,  and 
even  his  plan  of  going  on  the  Crusade  in  person  failed  to  produce 
the  effect  on  which  he  had  calculated.  Philip  of  Burgundy, 
whose  father  had  been  kiUed  by  the  Turks,  had  promised  to  go 
if  any  other  prince  did  so  too.  Pius  himself  was  greater  than 
any  other  prince,  since  he  was  both  Pope  and  King.  "The 
noise  of  our  plan  will  come  as  a  crash  of  thunder  and  rouse  the 
minds  of  the  faithful  to  the  defence  of  their  religion,"  he  wrote. 
But  the  crash  did  not  raise  the  echo  which  was  expected.  Louis 
XL  held  obstinately  aloof,  and  allied  himself  with  Milan. 
Florence  joined  them  out  of  jealousy  of  Venice,  who  was  likely 
to  be  the  chief  gainer  from  the  Crusade.  Finally,  intrigues  in 
Burgundy  delayed  Philip's  start,  although  he  had  welcomed  the 
Pope's  project  with  enthusiasm. 

Meanwhile  Pius  was  undaunted.  The  discovery  of  alum 
mines  at  Tolfa  brought  in  large  sums  of  money  to  the  papal 
treasury  which  were  all  devoted  to  the  Crusade.  It  was  to  be 
the  great  act  of  atonement  for  the  sins  of  the  priesthood.  The 
priests  were  to  be  exhorted  to  join,  as  examples  to  the 
princes  :  "  Perchance  when  they  see  their  master,  the  Vicar  of 
Jesus  Christ,  though  old  and  sick,  advancing  to  the  war,  they 
will  feel  ashamed  to  stay  at  home  ".  Pius  was  not  old  in  years, 
but  he  was  delicate,  and  he  suffered  terribly  from  gout.  In  1464 
he  arrived  at  Ancona  where  the  forces  were  to  assemble.  He 
was  already  ill,  and  the  confusion  which  confronted  him  affected 
his  spirits.  He  was  not  a  good  organiser,  and  on  the  road  to 
Ancona  he  met  crowds  of  crusaders  who  were  discouraged  at  the 


THE  RENAISSANCE  TOrES  275 

first  stage  by  the  lack  of  provisions  at  the  seaport,  and  the 
inadequate  arrangements  for  mobilisation.  Venice  alone  was 
efficient,  but  her  efficiency  was  depressing  to  the  rest  of  the 
world,  and  particularly  to  the  penniless  enthusiasts  who  Hocked 
to  An'cona  without  any  means  of  subsistence  and  awaited  in  vain 
the  arrival  of  transports. 

In  August  it  became  apparent  that  the  Pope  was  dying.     The 
Venetian  ships  at  last  began  to  arrive,  and  he  watched  them 
from  his  window  overlooking  the  port,  his  whole  heart  set  on 
living  to  embark.     If  the  Pope  could  die  a  crusader,  surely  the 
Crusade  would  succeed.     He  could  not  believe  in  the  possibility 
of  failure,  and  he  was  fortunate  enough  not  to  be  disillusioned. 
The   Crusade   of  Pius  never  could  have  succeeded,  and  death 
saved   him   from    knowing   it.      The   shadow   of  mistrust    still 
hovered   over   him,   but  on  the  whole  he  died  a  hero.     There 
is  a  certain  simphcity  in  the  project  on  which  he  had  built  so 
many  hopes,  which  is  in  keeping  with  the  most  lovable  things 
known   about   him.     He   was   always  happiest  in  the  country, 
among   bhrds   and   trees   and  peasants,  living  quietly  and  un- 
pretentiously,  and  never  far  from  his  favourite  books.     For  in 
spite   of  his   intentions   Pius   remained   all  through  his  life  a 
humanist  at  heart.     "  Time  after  time  I  have  put  aside  poets 
and  histories,"  he  tells  us,  ''  but  like  a  moth  round  a  candle  I 
flutter  back  to  my  ruin."      The  instinct  of  self-expression  was 
too  strong  in  him  to  be  thwarted  by  his  sense  of  the  decorous. 
All  his  life  he  had  written  books  revealing  the  inner  workings 
of  his  mind,  from  the  improper  novel  of  his  early  yovith  to  the 
history  of  Asia,  which  embodies  the  dream  of  the  crusader-Pope. 
It  is  through  his  books  that  we  know  Pius  so  much  more  inti- 
mately than  most  of  the  Popes.     He  is  the  first  papal  historian 
who  writes  to  make  a  picture  of  his  own  times  for  posterity, 
and  his  own  character  stands  out  in  the  foregrovmd.     This  is 
his  real  importance  in  papal  history.     He  was  not  a  great  patron 
he  was  a  critic  rather  than  an  admirer  of  contemporary  Uterature, 
for  he  held  that  "  poets  and  orators  ought  to  be  supreme  or  they 
are  nothing "'.     He  was  not  even  a  great  scholar,  according  to 
the  academic  standard  of  his  age.     He  was  a  free-lance,  a  scien- 
tific investigator  of  humanity,  a  lover  of  by-ways  and  subtleties, 
readier  to  receive  impressions  than  to  impress  others,  "  not  a 
man  to  mould  the  world  but  to  be  moulded  by  it ".     He  left  the 
problem  of  the  Renaissance  Papacy  unsolved  :  how  far  could  it 
adapt  itself  to  the  new  spirit  without  losing  its  essential  char- 
acter ?    Between  the  Scylla  and  Charybdis  now  in  sight,  could 
a  com-se  be  found  for  St.  Peter's  ships  without  disaster   from 


276  A  SHOKT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

paganism  on  the  one  hand  and  the  Reformation  on  the  other  ? 
Everything  depended  on  the  hehnsman. 

The  seven  years'  pontificate  of  Paul  II.  (1464-1471),  who 
succeeded  Pius  II.,  has  on  the  whole  a  negative  value  in  papal 
history.  He  did  not  attempt  to  pursue  the  peace-policy  of 
Pius,  and  yet  his  assertion  of  an  aggressive  attitude  was  not 
pronounced  enough  to  succeed.  His  policy  was  always  non- 
committal ;  it  was  not  imperial,  not  Italian,  and  not  humanist, 
and  yet  he  did  not  definitely  discard  any  of  these  attitudes. 
Against  George  Podiebrad  of  Bohemia  he  adopted  the  practical 
expedient  of  using  Mathias  Corvinus  of  Hungary,  who  had  put 
himself  at  the  head  of  a  baronial  revolt.  The  Bohemian  war 
was  disastrous  in  the  face  of  the  Turkish  advance,  but  Paul 
cared  more  for  immediate  advantage  than  for  larger  ends.  In 
1468  Frederick  III.  visited  him  in  Rome,  and  tried  to  persuade 
Paul  to  recognise  his  own  claim  both  on  Bohemia  and  on  Hun- 
gary. But  Paul  had  other  ideas,  and  on  the  death  of  George 
Podiebrad  in  1471,  Ladislas  of  'Poland  succeeded  to  the  dis- 
tracted kingdom.  Ladislas  was  a  Catholic,  but  he  had  to  tolerate 
Utraquism,  which  had  flourished  under  George's  ill-defined 
orthodoxy  until  it  had  taken  root  in  the  national  life. 

In  Italy,  Paul  tried  unsuccessfully  to  carry  on  the  war  of  the 
Papacy  against  the  Malatesta,  until  in  1470  the  combined  in- 
fluences of  Ferrante  and  the  Crusade  led  him  to  make  peace. 
Meanwhile  he  was  occupied  with  the  most  significant  struggle 
of  his  pontificate,  which  brought  down  on  him  the  hostility  of 
humanism.  In  his  own  way  Paul  was  just  as  much  a  child  of 
the  Renaissance  as  Pius :  he  had  indeed  a  greater  and  wider 
love  of  beautiful  treasures,  but,  unlike  his  predecessor,  his  mind 
was  as  decorous  as  his  person.  Pius  II.  had  not  always  been 
kind  to  the  humanists  who  thronged  round  him,  but  his  dis- 
favour took  the  form  of  contempt  for  their  mediocrity  rather 
than  disapproval  of  their  morals.  Paul  II.  had  a  rooted  dislike 
of  the  mental  and  moral  outlook  of  the  humanists  of  1460-1470. 
He  resented  their  claim  to  be  outside  religion  and  morals.  He 
saw  that  it  was  unreasonable  to  punish  heresy  in  Bohemia  and 
to  condone  atheism  in  Rome.  From  the  other  side  the  quarrel 
began  with  Paul's  schemes  for  reforming  his  household  in  1464. 
He  decided  to  abolish  the  crowd  of  abbreviators,  or  under- 
secretaries, whom  the  Pope  found  it  difficult  either  to  control,  to 
employ,  or  to  pay.  Most  of  the  abbreviators  were  humanists, 
among  them  the  historian  Platina,  and  their  literary  vengeance 
has  made  it  difficult  to  form  a  just  estimate  of  Paul's  character. 
His  other  great  fight  with  humanism  was  his  attack  on  the 


THE  KENAISSANCE  POPES  277 

Roman  Academy  in  1468.     The  Academy  had  begun  as  a  genuine 
association  of  scholars  and  antiquarians  who  gathered  round  the 
Stoic  teacher   Pomponius  Lectus.     It  had  degenerated  mtoa 
silly  and  self-conscious  institution  which  wasted  its  energies  in 
profane  attacks  on  Christianity,  and  gained  its  recruits  from  the 
unemployed  abbreviators.     Paul  II.  was  obliged  to  punish  the 
Academy,  which  flaunted  its  emancipation  in  his  face.     He  ac- 
cordingly arrested  and  imprisoned  Platina  and  Pomponius.    But 
the  futility  and  chHdishness  of  the   Stoic   philosophers,  who 
promised  "  to  celebrate  in  prose  and  verse  the  name  of  Paul "  if 
he  would  set  them  free,  convinced  Paul  of  their  essential  harm- 
lessness.     The  Academicians  regained  their  liberty,  and  Platina 
showed  his  gratitude  by  writing  an  unfriendly  life  of  Paul  in  his 
"Lives  of  the  Popes,"  in  which  he  describes  him  as  "a  great 
enemy  and   despiser  of  human   learning,  branding   those   for 
heretics  that  gave  their  minds  to  it".     The  Academy  and  the 
fortunes  of  Platina  revived  under  Sixtus  IV.,  but  Paul  II.  can- 
not fairly  be  condemned  for  his  attitude  towards  a  corporation 
which  attacked  religion  with  the  weapons  of  buffoonery. 

Through  his  supposed  attack  on  humanism  Paul  alienated 
many  of  the  Cardinals,  who,  like  Bessarion,  were  its  strong  sup- 
porters. His  high-handed  dealings  with  the  pretensions  of  the 
College  lost  for  him  the  sympathy  of  the  rest.  He  wanted  the 
Cardinals  to  be  magnificent  and  splendid  but  entirely  dependent 
on  himself.  He  liked  to  walk  among  them  in  processions,  his 
own  the  tallest  and  most  distinguished  figure  of  the  dignified  and 
imposing  band  of  princes.  He  had  no  closer  bond  with  them 
than  this,  and  he  did  not  care  for  intimate  intercourse  of  any 
kind.  Even  his  three  nephews  were  not  specially  favoured,  and 
impartiality  and  kindliness  were  his  chief  social  aims.  He 
hated  to  refuse  petitions,  and  therefore  gave  few  audiences.  He 
dreaded  above  aU  things  to  condemn  a  criminal  to  death.  And 
yet  he  could  be  severe  on  occasions,  as  when  he  would  suddenly 
flash  round  on  an  impostor  with  the  words,  "  You  are  not  speak- 
ing the  truth".  "He  is  surrounded  by  darkness,"  was  Am- 
manati's  description  of  him,  and  the  knowledge  that  he  was  not 
loved  saddened  him,  for,  as  he  said,  "  a  little  wormwood  can 
pollute  a  hive  of  honey". 

But  the  real  Ufe  of  Paul  II.  was  among  inanimate  things. 
His  companions  were  his  treasures,  and  his  delight  was  in  the 
jewels  which  he  took  to  bed  with  him  that  he  might  feast  his 
eyes  on  them  in  the  hours  of  the  night  when  he  was  kept  awake 
by  asthma.  He  loved  to  strive  with  other  great  collectors  for 
an  object  of  preciosity  on  which  he  had  iset  his  heart.     His 


278  A  SHOKT  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

greatest  triumphs  were  those  in  which  he  successfully — but 
always  honestly — outwitted  an  Alfonso,  or  an  Este,  or  a  Medici 
in  the  purchase  of  a  vase  or  a  stone.  Even  in  thig  passion, 
which  was  shared  by  so  many  of  his  contemporaries,  he  was  not 
understood.  His  pleasure  in  beautiful  things  was  aesthetic, 
while  theirs  was  antiquarian ;  they  collected  for  display,  while 
he  enjoyed  his  treasures  in  solitude.  He  was  a  Renaissance 
Pope,  for  the  Renaissance  had  made  him,  but  he  was  more  con- 
spicuous as  an  example  of  individuality  in  the  age  when  the 
individual  personality  first  comes  into  play  among  political 
forces. 


CHAPTER  XXIV. 
THE  SECULAR  PAPACY,  1471-1503. 

IF  we  apply  the  written  language  of  the  average  canonist  of 
the   fourteenth  century   to   the   Papacy   in   the   time   of 
Sixtus   IV.   (1471-1484),  we  shall  find  that  the   distance 
travelled  in  the  hundred  years  is  so  great  that  it  seems  like  a 
break  in  the  continuity  of  papal  history.     But  it  was  the  world 
which  had  changed,  and  the  rise  of  the  nations  which  had  dis- 
possessed the  Papacy  by  its  universality  as  completely  as  the 
Popes  themselves  had  triumphed  over  the  claims  of  the  Empire 
in  the  early  Middle  Ages.     The  conception  of  the  Papacy  as  a 
world-state,  binding  the  kingdoms  of  Europe  in  a  harmonious 
circle  of  common  obedience,  could  no  longer  stand  against  the 
vigorous  realism  of  the  new  era.     "The  spell  of  dogmatic  tran- 
scendentalism"  was    broken    by    the    dominance   of  political 
interests  and  practical  methods  which  characterise  the  fifteenth 
century.     The  efforts  of  Martin  V.  to  restore  the  temporal  power, 
the  struggles  of  Eugenius  IV.  with  the  papal  vicars,  the  syste- 
matic nepotism  of  Sixtus  IV.,  and  the  definite  family  policy  of 
Alexander  VI.  are  progressive  stages  in  the  process  of  readjust- 
ment by  which  the  Papacy  was  to  be  transformed  into  a  modern 

political  state. 

Side  by  side  with  the  growth  of  consolidation  we  find  another 
tendency,    equally    inevitable— the  process    of  secularisation. 
Neither  of  these  forces  is  quite  new  in  the  fifteenth  century— they 
are  both  in  a  sense  inherent  in  the  rise  of  temporal  power  which 
had  begun  with  Hildebrand,  and  perhaps  even  before  him,  in 
the  evolution  of  the  Patrimony.     But  a  movement  which  dom- 
inates one  age  often  has  its  roots  in  another,  and  the  secular 
Papacy,  like  the  Renaissance  itself,  belongs  none  the  less  to  the 
fifteenth  century,  although  we  can  trace  its  beginnings  in  the 
ages  preoccupied  by  other  principles  and  interests.     The  fifteenth 
century  Popes  were  wise  in  their  generation :  those  succeeded 
best  who  best  played  their  neighbours'  game,  and  gave  up  the 
attempt  to  reduce  a  non-religious  age  to  obedience  to  a  spiritual 
institution.     Conspicuous  among  the  failures  we  find  Eugeuius 

279 


280  A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

IV.,  wounded  in  his  ecclesiastical  capacity  by  his  political 
antagonists  and  unable  to  descend  from  the  clerical  high-horse. 
Even  more  tragic  was  the  attempt  of  Pius  II.  to  revive  the 
theocratic  principle,  and  to  lead  Europe  to  the  Crusades,  un- 
conscious of  the  fact  that  his  failure  is  both  the  cause  and  the 
result  of  his  success  as  a  temporal  prince.  Popes  like  Nicolas 
V.  and  Paul  11.  had  shown  superior  intuition  by  their  identifica- 
tion of  the  Papacy  with  the  Renaissance.  The  essence  of  the 
new  monarchy  was  popularity :  the  Renaissance  Popes,  like  the 
Medici  of  Florence  and  the  Tudors  of  England,  owed  their 
strength  to  the  fact  that  they  gave  their  subjects  what  they 
wanted.  The  Italian  subjects  of  the  fifteenth-century  Popes 
wanted  strong  local  government,  money  to  spend  in  pageants, 
and  an  ample  satisfaction  of  their  desire  for  beauty — all  which 
is  summed  up  in  the  word  "  civiltd  ", 

The  early  fifteenth-century  Popes,  beginning  with  Martin  V., 
had  aimed  at  territorial  monarchy,  but  they  had  not  pursued 
it  along  any  definite  political  line.  Sixtus  IV.  chose  out  of 
the  many  alternatives  the  safest  and  most  congenial,  that  of 
nepotism.  He  showed  the  aggressive  family  pride  of  a  self- 
made  man,  whose  very  name  was  borrowed  from  another.  As 
Francesco  della  Rovere  he  had  been  General  of  the  Franciscans, 
and  he  was  known  as  a  learned  man  of  limited  outlook  and 
boundless  energy.  Round  him  flocked  his  vigorous  young 
nephews,  one  of  whom,  Piero  Riario,  had  secured  his  election 
by  judicious  bribery  among  the  Cardinals.  The  nepotism  of 
earlier  Popes  had  been  haphazard  favouritism :  Sixtus  used  it 
deliberately  in  order  to  strengthen  his  position.  He  instantly 
made  two  young  nephews  Cardinals,  and  allowed  the  younger, 
the  same  Piero,  to  exhaust  himself  in  debauchery  so  that  he 
died  in  four  years  at  the  age  of  twenty-nine.  For  the  other 
young  Cardinal,  Giuliano  della  Rovere,  a  more  brilliant  future 
was  reserved.  A  third  nephew,  by  his  marriage  with  the  daughter 
of  Ferrante  of  Naples,  was  the  pivot  of  a  Neapolitan  alliance  on 
which  turned  the  Italian  policy  of  Sixtus.  Another  Delia 
Rovere  married  the  daughter  of  Federico  of  Urbino  and  became 
Duke  of  Sinigaglia,  thus  opening  up  the  way  to  Romagna,  which 
was  the  main  objective.  Romagna  was  to  be  the  territorial 
expression  of  the  Pope's  personal  monarchy,  held,  not  by  the 
old  weak  feudal  tie,  but  by  a  strong  family  bond  which  was 
very  nearly  dynastic.  That  Sixtus  IV.  failed,  as  Alexander  VI. 
was  to  fail,  in  founding  an  Italian  dynasty  was  due  to  no  de- 
ficiency of  character  but  to  the  limitations  of  the  Papacy.  The 
Pope  could  play  the  political  game  as  well  as  any  of  his  con- 


THE  SECULAK  PAPACY  281 

temporary  rulers;  he  could  bind  territories  to  his  family  and 
his  nephews  to  himself.  But  in  an  intensely  personal  age  he 
alone  could  not  perpetuate  the  personal  tie.  His  children  and 
his  nephews,  as  such,  had  no  claim  on  their  subjects'  allegiance, 
and  on  the  death  of  a  Pope,  the  cities  and  territories  which  he 
had  ruled  would  remember  their  ecclesiastical  obedience  as  an 
excuse  to  throw  off  their  anomalous  lords.  Pontificates  were 
short,  and  no  Pope  could  ever  count  on  influencing  the  election 
of  his  successor.  In  this  lay  the  condemnation  of  nepotism  as 
a  political  factor,  which  is  illustrated  by  most  of  the  papal 
families  of  the  Renaissance,  but  pre-eminently  in  the  lives  of 
the  Delia  Rovere  and  the  Borgia. 

The  crowing  secularisation  of  the  Papacy  increased  the 
worldly  appearance  of  the  Vatican  Court.  When  Leonora  of 
Naples  came  to  Rome  to  marry  Leonardo  della  Rovere  her 
brothers  and  cousins-in-law  gave  her  a  magnificent  reception,  in 
which  a  wild  man  in  sugar  and  a  bear  roasted  in  his  skin  played 
conspicuous  parts.  After  the  death  of  Cardinal  Piero,  Sixtus 
passed  a  series  of  sumptuary  laws  for  the  Cardinals  forbidding 
them  to  hunt,  or  to  wear  short  hose,  bright  colours,  or  long  hair. 
He  forebore  from  making  Girolamo  Riario  a  Cardinal  when  he 
succeeded  his  brother  in  his  uncle's  afifection.  Sixtus  kept  him 
a  layman,  and  bought  for  him  the  lordship  of  Imola  from  the 
Duke  of  Milan,  together  with  the  hand  of  the  Duke's  splendid 
illegitimate  daughter,  Caterina.  The  Jubilee  of  1475  attracted 
very  few  pilgrims  except  those  who,  like  Ferrante  of  Naples, 
made  it  a  cover  for  a  political  mission.  Rumours  were  abroad 
in  Europe  of  the  debauchery  of  the  Pope's  family  and  the 
unseemliness  of  his  court.  In  Italy,  outraged  decorum  was 
allied  to  political  apprehension.  A  league  of  the  three  gi'eat 
Northern  powers— Milan,  Florence,  and  Venice— was  formed  in 
1474,  nominally  to  protect  the  peace  of  Italy,  actually  to  keep  a 
watchful  eye  on  the  Pope  and  the  King  of  Naples.  Sixtus  failed 
in  numerous  attempts  to  break  up  the  triple  alliance  which  he 
rightly  regarded  as  a  barrier  to  his  family  policy.  For  various 
reasons  Florence  was  the  most  probable  aggressor,  and  at  first 
Sixtus  had  taken  some  pains  to  propitiate  her.  He  had  allowed 
Lorenzo  de  Medici  to  buy  the  treasures  of  Paul  II.,  and  he  had 
appointed  the  Medici  as  his  bankers  in  Rome. 

Sixtus  IV.  and  the  Medici,  as  the  two  leading  powers  in 
Italy,  were  natural  enemies.  Florence  had  everything  to  gain  in 
thwarting  the  plans  of  Sixtus  in  the  Romagna  :  Sixtus  could  not 
get  far  without  wounding  the  dominions  of  Florence.  The 
trouble  began  with  Imola.     Florence  had  always  wanted  it,  and 


282  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

now  Milan  had  ceded  it  to  the  Pope's  nephew.  The  circum- 
stances were  aggravated  by  the  refusal  of  Sixtus  to  make 
Giuliano  de  Medici  a  Cardinal,  and  the  transference  of  the 
Pope's  banking  business  from  the  Medici  to  the  older  Florentine 
firm  of  the  Pazzi.  When  finally,  in  1474,  Giuliano  della  Rovere  ' 
was  engaged  in  putting  down  a  rebellion  in  Spoleto,  the  inter- 
ference of  Florence  brought  Paolo  Vitelli,  who  had  helped  the 
rebels,  to  terms  before  he  had  been  sufficiently  humiliated. 
The  inadequate  results  of  the  disturbance  rankled  in  the  mind 
of  Sixtus,  and  led  to  the  crisis  connected  with  the  Pazzi 
conspiracy  in  1478. 

The  Pazzi  conspiracy  was  an  attempt  to  overthrow  the  rule 
of  the  Medici  in  Florence,  and  its  failm'e  is  the  highest  testimony 
to  the  popularity  of  the  great  tyrant  house.  The  murder  of 
Galeazzo  Maria  Sforza  at  Milan  in  1476  had  produced  a  wave 
of  admiration  for  the  ethics  of  political  assassination,  which 
infected  a  handful  of  discontented  Florentines.  Girolamo  Riario, 
who  foresaw  disaster  to  his  own  position  in  the  event  of  hie 
uncle's  death,  used  this  spirit  to  rid  himself  of  his  arch-enemies, 
the  Medici,  by  working  on  the  rivalry  of  the  Pazzi.  Sixtus  was 
equally  anxious  for  the  overthrow  of  Lorenzo,  and  recognised 
the  danger  of  Girolamo's  position  now  that  his  family  connection 
with  Milan  was  broken.  But  as  Pope  he  could  not  go  so  far  as 
to  countenance  assassination.  The  chosen  assassin,  Montesecco, 
had  an  interview  with  him  in  which  Sixtus  expressed  his  desire 
for  the  overthrow  of  the  Medici  without  their  death.  He  would 
not  be  caught  by  Girolamo's  attempt  to  exhort  from  him  a 
pardon  for  the  murder  before  its  committal.  "  You  are  a  beast," 
was  his  answer  to  his  favourite ;  "  I  tell  you  I  do  not  wish  any 
man's  death,  but  a  change  of  government."  The  Pope  had 
washed  his  hands,  but  the  criminal  preparations  went  forward. 
Giuliano  de  Medici  was  stabbed  before  the  High  Altar  of  the 
Duomo  on  April  26,  1478.  Lorenzo  escaped  at  the  expense  of 
the  life  of  a  friend.  The  Florentines  showed  in  what  quarter 
their  suspicions  lay  by  imprisoning  young  Cardinal  Raflfaello, 
the  great-nephew  of  the  Pope,  who  was  celebrating  Mass  at  the 
time  of  the  murder.  The  plot  had  failed,  for  Lorenzo  lived  to 
reap  the  results  in  an  outflow  of  popular  enthusiasm  which  was 
poured  into  pamphlets  directed  to  the  Pope.  Sixtus  put  Lorenzo 
under  the  Ban,  and  Florence  under  the  Interdict  for  supporting 
him.  The  quarrel  grew  wider :  Louis  XL  tried  and  failed  to 
arbitrate,  and  the  city  became  more  and  more  passionately  loyal 
to  the  Medici  party,  and  increasingly  hostile  to  Sixtus.  The 
trouble  grew  into  war,  in  which  Naples  supported  the  Pope,  and 


THE  SECULAK  PAPACY  283 

Florence  gained  what  help  bIio  could  from  her  uninterested 
allies.  The  Pazzi  wars  found  Florence  ill-prepared:  the 
aggressor  was  really  Sixtus,  who  was  anxious  to  secure  the 
position  of  Girolamo  in  Imola  by  every  means  he  could.  In 
1479  Lorenzo  travelled  to  Naples  to  arrange  a  peace  with 
Ferrante:  in  1480  he  made  terms  with  Sixtus  IV.  The  Turks 
had  occupied  Otranto,  and  as  usual  Italy  was  reawakened  to  a 
moment's  national  consciousness  by  the  disaster. 

Lorenzo  and  Sixtus  had  laid  aside  their  quarrel  at  the  news  of 
the  landing  of  the  Turks  in  Italy.     They  took  it  up  again  when  in 
1481  the  Turks  retired.     But  the  position  was  not  the  same  as 
before,  for  Lorenzo  had  founded  his  peace  with  Naples  more  firmly 
than  with  Sixtus.     On  the  other  hand,  Venice  had  made  peace 
with  the  Pope  out  of  jealousy  of  the  "unnatural"  Florentine- 
Neapolitan  alliance.     In  1482  a  fresh  war  broke  out,  which  was 
famous  in  Italian  history  for  its  exceptionally  deadly  character. 
The  aggression  of  Girolamo  Riario  lay  at  the  back  of  it,  as  of  all 
the  political  schemes  of  Sixtus.     This  tempestuous  young  man 
had   added   Forli   to   Imola,   and    showed    further   designs   on 
Fen-ara.     But  it  was  one   thing   to   overthrow   the   unpopular 
House  of  the  Ordelaffi  at  Forli,  and  quite  another  to  oppose  the 
powerful  Este  of  Ferrara,  with  the  support  of  their  kinsman  the 
King  of  Naples.     Girolamo  and  his  "dark  designs"  were  even 
more  than  Italy  could  stand,  and  Federigo  of  Urbino  refused  to 
serve  as  papal  condottiere.     Roberto  Malatesta  took  his   place, 
and  both  the  leaders  fell  in  the  great  battle  of  Campo  Morto, 
August  21,  1482.     It  was  technically  a  victory  for  Sixtus,  but  it 
was  barren  of  results.    Ferrara  was  unconquered,  and  Rome  was 
distracted  by  a  blood  feud  which  had  produced  an  acute  revival 
of  Colonna-Orsini  hostility.     Riario  was  making  liimself  person- 
ally  odious  wherever  he  went,  and  Venice  was  behaving  in  a 
high-handed  way  as  the  Pope's  ally.     It  only  needed  ecclesias- 
tical opposition  to  complete  the  Pope's  discomfiture,  and  this 
element  was  supplied  by  the  Archbishop  of  Krain,  a  simple- 
hearted  German  who  had  been  imprisoned  for  plain-speaking 
when,  on  a  visit  to  Rome  in  1479,  he  had  been  shocked  at  the 
moral  atmosphere  which  he  found  there.    He  now  reappeared  in 
the  ominous  city  of  Basle,  where  he  published  his  opinion  of 
Sixtus   as    a   son    of    the   devil,   etc.,  and    invited   the    Pope's 
enemies  to  a  Council.     Krain's  words  and  his   methods   were 
antiquated,    but   Florence    and    Milan    showed    Home    interest 
in  him,    and   Sixtus   was   alarmed   in  proportion   as   he   knew 
himself   to    be   vulnerable.      The   belated  conciliar   movement 
came  to  nothing,  and   Krain  hanged  himself  in  a  prison  cell 


284    A  SHORT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

in  1484.     But  his  action  had  a  marked  effect  on  the  policy  of 
Sixtus. 

The  last  phase  of  the  Italian  policy  of  Sixtus  begins  in  1482, 
when  in  December  he  made  peace  with  Ferrara,  and  ordered 
Venice  to  do  the  same.  Bat  Venice  had  her  own  reasons  for  pur- 
suing the  war,  and  refused  at  the  point  of  victory  to  abandon  it. 
Sixtus  promptly  faced  round  on  his  too-powerful  ally,  and  joined 
the  confederacy  of  her  foes.  Fortified  by  the  further  support  of 
Louis  XI.  of  France,  who  might  otherwise  have  taken  up  the 
conciliar  cry,  the  Pope  excommunicated  the  Venetians,  and 
refused  to  open  negotiations  with  them  until  they  should  have 
been  driven  back  from  their  mainland  conquests.  On  his 
death-bed  in  the  following  year,  Sixtus  had  to  ratify  a  peace 
dictated  by  his  allies  on  less  exorbitant  terms.  He  did  so 
indignantly  and  under  pressure,  for  a  last  desperate  struggle 
with  the  Colonna  had  spent  the  flame  of  his  wonderful  energy. 
His  last  recorded  act  is  one  of  broken  faith.  The  Colonnesi 
had  taken  the  part  of  Naples  against  him  on  the  field  of  Campo 
Morto.  They  had  headed  the  opposition  to  Girolamo  Riario,  and 
in  revenge  Sixtus  pursued  them  with  the  fury  of  Nemesis. 
Castle  after  castle  was  seized,  and  the  last  two  were  delivered  up 
by  Fabrizio  Colonna  as  the  price  of  the  life  of  his  brother  Oddo, 
then  in  the  Pope's  hands.  Oddo  was  submitted  to  a  mock  trial 
and  executed,  and  his  mangled  remains  were  sent  to  his  mother 
who  found  in  them  the  proof  of  the  faith  of  Pope  Sixtus. 

Oddo  Colonna,  like  his  fellow  victims  the  Ordelaffi,  Giuliano 
de  Medici,  and  many  others,  were  sacrificed  to  the  ascendancy 
of  the  secular  Papacy.  The  seal  of  Machiavelli's  approval  con- 
firms the  worst  deeds  of  Sixtus  IV.,  for  they  showed  how  "things 
that  before  were  called  errors  could  be  hidden  behind  the  papal 
authority  ".  Since  Machiavelli  laid  down  the  ethics  of  villainy, 
the  successful  criminals  of  the  world  have  never  been  without 
an  apologist.  But  Sixtus  IV.  was  not  really  one  of  these :  few 
crimes  can  be  directly  brought  home  to  him,  and  still  fewer  met 
with  the  justification  of  success.  His  very  energy  was  borrowed, 
and  the  odium  which  followed  him  was  incurred  by  others. 

The  sensual  crimes  of  Piero  Riario  and  the  recklessness  of 
Girolamo  were  cloaked  by  the  official  position  of  their  uncle, 
whose  complacence  and  connivance  were  his  worst  faults.  He 
never  pretended  to  be  other  than  a  worldling,  but  judged  by 
contemporary  standards — taking  for  granted,  that  is,  the  low 
moral  values  of  his  age — he  still  remains  a  failure.  None  of 
his  plans  succeeded :  he  had  failed  to  overthrow  Lorenzo  de 
Medici,  Ferrara  held  out  against  him  to  the  last,  and  Venice  had 


THE  SECULAR  PAPACY  285 

successfully  braved  his  anger  and  asserted  herself  against  him, 
first  as  an  ally  and  later  as  a  foe.  Naples  had  coquetted  with 
him  and  thrown  him  over  at  the  bidding  of  Florence,  while  the 
Colonna  had  made  him  pay  dearly  for  the  barren  privilege  of 
humiliating  them. 

In  art  as  in  politics,  undiscriminating  energy  marked  the 
pontificate  of  Sixtus.  The  Sistine  Chapel,  which  is  his  gi-eatest 
monument,  is  not  a  thing  of  beauty  in  itself,  but  it  is  interesting 
as  showing  the  beginning  of  Renaissance  architecture  in  Rome. 
His  artists  formed  themselves  into  the  confraternity  of  St.  Luke, 
and  among  them  were  the  most  brilliant  names  of  the  splendid 
period  But  it  has  often  been  remarked  that  none  of  them— not 
even  Ghirlandaio  or  Perugino  or  Botticelli— did  themselves 
justice  under  the  influence  of  the  Pope.  The  second-rate  work 
of  Cosirao  Roselli  won  the  prize  in  the  fresco  competition  for 
the  walls  of  the  Sistine,  possibly  because  his  pliable  talent 
submitted  itself  more  easily  to  the  taste  of  his  patron. 

Humanism  too  received  impetus  under  Sixtus,  but  again  of 
the  uncritical,  mediocre  type,  and  Platina's  name  alone  stands 
out  among  the  crowd  of  scholars  who  blessed  the  name  of  the 
Pope.  To  the  foundation  of  the  Vatican  library  we  owe  one  of 
the  most  interesting  portraits  which  papal  history  gives.  Melozzo 
da  Forli's  picture  represents  Sixtus  giving  the  keys  of  the  library 
to  Platina,  with  his  nephews  standing  round  him.  As  a  family 
portrait  it  is  full  of  character,  and  in  the  features  of  the  della 
Rovere  and  Riario  nephews  we  can  trace  the  same  brutal  energy 
which  directed  the  policy  of  Sixtus  and  enabled  him  to  leave 
so  deep  an  impression  on  the  character  of  the   Papacy.^ 

The  confusion  on  the  death  of  Sixtus  was  unusually  great, 
owing  to  the  number  of  militant  spirits  in  the  College.  Jobbery 
ran  so  high  that  the  strongest  candidates  defeated  each  other, 
and  finally  Cardinal  Cibo  of  Genoa  was  elected  by  the  combined 
influence  of  Cardinal  Rovere  and  Cardinal  Borgia.  Innocent 
VIII.  (1484-1492)  was  not  in  any  way  remarkable,  except  for  a 
certain  honesty  which  led  him  to  acknowledge  openly  a  large 
family  of  children,  two  of  whom  played  conspicuous  parts  in 
the  history  of  his  pontificate.  But  the  Cibo  family  were  not  of 
the  stufi"  of  which  the  Rovere  were  made.  Innocent's  daughter, 
Teodorina,  was  married  to  a  rich  Genoese  merchant,  and  quite 
content  with  her  lot.  The  only  son  who  made  any  mark  was 
Franceschetto,  who  lived  at  first  at  the  Vatican  Court  and  was 

1  For  an  interesting  account  of  this  picture,  see  "  Rome  and  the  Renais- 
sance," by  Klaczko,  Ch.  I. 


286  A  SHOET  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

generally  known  as  Innocent's  nephew.  In  aadition  to  these, 
the  Pope  was  credited  with  fourteen  other  children,  but  this  is 
probably  an  exaggeration :  he  was  too  kind  a  father  not  to  have 
made  provision  for  them,  and  they  would  surely  have  left  traces 
of  their  existence  in  an  age  in  which  the  Pope's  nephews 
ranked  as  princes. 

Sixtus  IV.  had  at  least  a  definite  policy :  Innocent  VIII.  was 
content  to  drift  with  the  tide.  Trivulzio,  the  great  soldier,  gives 
an  estimate  of  him  which  history  cannot  deny — "  The  Pope  is 
full  of  greed,  cowardice,  and  baseness  like  a  common  knave ; 
were  there  not  men  about  him  who  inspired  him  with  some 
spirit,  he  would  crawl  away  like  a  rabbit,  and  grovel  like  any 
dastard  "  (Creighton,  IV.,  p.  148).  It  was  true  that  Innocent  was 
controlled  by  master-minds.  His  first  policy  was  dictated  by 
Giuliano  della  Rovere,  who  had  manipulated  his  election.  In 
accordance  with  the  Rovere  tradition  he  supported  the  Nea- 
politan barons  against  Ferrante  of  Naples.  The  French  claims 
on  Naples  had  now  passed  to  the  crown,  and  out  of  fear  of 
French  intervention  Florence  and  Milan  sided  with  Ferrante. 
But  the  Cardinals  present  in  Rome  shared  the  universal  fear  of 
France,  and  at  their  urgency  and  during  the  absence  of  Giuliano 
in  France,  Innocent  was  induced  to  make  peace  in  1486.  The 
appalling  state  of  Rome  had  contributed  to  the  need  for  peace. 
The  Orsini  had  joined  Ferrante,  and  Virginio  Orsini  was  besieging 
Rome  when  Sanseverino  relieved  it,  but  the  mercenaries  on  both 
sides  plundered  the  city  with  indiscriminate  zeal.  But  the 
peace  was  dishonourable  to  Innocent,  who  had  sacrificed  his 
allies,  the  barons  and  the  Colonna,  and  it  infuriated  Cardinal 
Rovere  who  found  on  his  return  that  his  sun  had  set. 

Lorenzo  de  Medici  dominated  the  second  policy  of  Innocent. 
He  bought  the  Pope  with  his  daughter,  Maddalena,  whom  he 
offered  as  a  bride  for  Franceschetto.  The  offer  was  irresistible, 
and  since  Maddalena  was  the  daughter  of  Clarice  Orsini,  Vir- 
ginio's  sister,  it  meant  a  reversal  of  the  Pope's  earlier  alliance 
with  the  Colonna  party.  Neither  this  consideration,  nor  a  half- 
concluded  alliance  with  Venice,  which  had  to  lapse,  hindered 
Innocent  from  carrying  out  the  Medici  marriage.  Virginio 
Orsini  was  taken  into  favour,  and  Giuliano  della  Rovere  was 
kept  at  a  distance.  Henceforth  Lorenzo  controlled  the  Vatican 
policy,  and  it  was  fortunate  for  the  Pope  that  he  had  fallen  into 
such  capable  hands.  In  1488  the  murder  of  Girolamo  Riario  by 
his  subjects  in  Imola  was  laid  at  the  door  of  Innocent,  and 
when  the  courage  of  Girolamo's  wife,  Caterina,  saved  the  city  for 
her  son,  Innocent  was  further  accused  of  deserting  the  rebels 


THE  SECULAR  PAPACY  287 

whom  he  had  at  first  encouraged.  Innocent  was  the  kind  of 
person  who  would  always  be  accused  of  breach  of  faith,  because 
he  cared  nothing  about  consistency.  But  Girolamo's  death  was 
naturally  welcomed  by  his  life-long  enemy,  Lorenzo,  and  in  the 
following  year  the  Pope's  alliance  with  the  Medici  was  drawn 
closer  than  ever  by  the  appointment  of  Lorenzo's  son,  Giovanni, 
to  the  cardinalate. 

Innocent's  dealings  with  the  King  of  France  were  as  ineffec- 
tive as  his  Italian  schemes.  The  Florentine  alliance  had  inter- 
rupted his  negotiations  with  Charles  VIII.  concerning  Naples, 
but  a  curious  .little  intrigue  had  been  carried  out  round  the  pic- 
turesque figure  of  Djem.  Djem  was  the  Sultan's  brother,  who 
had  been  captured  by  the  Knights  of  St.  John  at  Rhodes,  and 
placed  by  them  under  the  protection  of  the  French  Crown.  He 
was  a  most  useful  person  in  many  ways  because  he  was  both 
the  rival  of  the  reigning  Sultan,  Bajazet  II.,  and  a  hostage  for 
his  good  behaviour.  He  was  also  the  much-desired  of  every 
European  province,  and  the  paying-guest  of  his  captors.  Every 
one  offered  bribes  to  the  Regent  of  France  for  the  privilege  of  en- 
tertaining Djem,  but  Innocent  held  a  trump  card  in  the  offer  of 
a  cardinalate  to  the  Grand  Master  of  the  Knights.  At  the  same 
time  he  was  prepared  to  withhold  a  dispensation  from  Anne  of 
Brittany,  who  wanted  to  marry  her  cousin  within  the  prohibited 
degrees,  and  so  to  enable  the  King  of  France  to  marry  her,  and 
add  Brittany  to  France.  It  was  nothing  to  Innocent  that  Anne 
and  Charles  were  both  pledged  by  previous  contracts :  he  even 
showed  himself  complacent  enough  to  condone  the  fact  that  the 
marriage  was  accomplished  ten  days  before  the  Bulls  arrived. 
Meanwhile,  Djem  had  come  to  Rome  in  1489,  and  the  proud, 
silent  Oriental,  who  refused  the  courtesies  and  gifts  of  his  captors, 
formed  a  dignified  contrast  to  the  fussy  duplicities  of  the  Pope. 
The  interviews  between  Innocent  and  Djem  outraged  public 
opinion  in  a  way  that  the  worst  immoralities  of  the  Cardinals 
and  irregularities  of  the  Popes  failed  to  do.  Only  a  generation 
ago  Pius  II.  had  appealed  to  the  Church  militant  to  combine 
against  the  infidel  in  a  Holy  War.  His  third  successor  was  now 
exchanging  courtesies  on  equal  terms  with  a  Moslem  prince,  who 
was  at  once  his  guest  and  his  paymaster. 

In  the  year  1492,  Cardinal  Borgia  gave  a  magnificent  bull- 
fight in  Rome  to  celebrate  the  Union  of  the  Spanish  Monarchy 
and  the  fall  of  Granada.  Both  these  events  were  important  for 
the  future  of  the  Papacy.  The  strong  new  kingdom  of  Spain 
was  bound  by  the  iron  bond  of  the  Inquisition  to  the  Pope's 
service,  and  the  Moors,  who  were  expelled  from  Granada,  swelled 


288  A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

the  ranks  of  the  infidels  of  South  Italy,  and  made  Rome  more 
pagan  than  ever.  At  about  the  same  time  young  Giovanni  de 
Medici  came  to  Rome  to  begin  his  life  as  a  Cardinal,  fortified  by 
Lorenzo's  wise  letter  of  advice,  in  which  he  warns  hind  against 
the  dangers  of  Rome  as  a  "  sink  of  iniquities  ",  Giovanni  must 
have  missed  in  Rome  the  cultivated  society  to  which  he  was 
accustomed  in  Florence,  but  he  left  his  own  city  on  the  eve  of 
sorrow.  Later  on  in  the  year  Lorenzo  died,  and  the  golden  age 
of  Florentine  civilta  gave  place  to  a  period  of  constitutional 
upheaval.  The  exquisite  day-dream  of  Platonic  philosophy  and 
ephemeral  pleasure,  in  which  the  discussions  of  the  Academy 
and  the  laughter  of  carnival  had  an  equal  share,  passed  away 
with  Lorenzo  de  Medici,  and  Florence  awoke  to  the  sound  of 
controversy  and  civic  strife.  Savonarola  already  held  sway  by 
his  preaching,  and  Piero  de  Medici  was  giving  proof  of  the  in- 
capacity which  was  to  bring  his  house  to  ruin.  In  the  middle 
of  these  great  events  Innocent  VIII.  died,  old  and  unregretted, 
except  by  the  children  for  whom  he  had  toiled.  Before  his 
death  he  had  just  married  his  grand-daughter  to  Ferrante's 
grandson.  These  marriages  cost  him  a  lot  of  money,  and,  in 
order  to  obtain  it,  he  had  created  and  sold  new  offices  in  the 
Curia.  The  result  of  this  was  to  lower  the  standard  of  the 
officials  of  his  court,  and  dishonesty  and  forgery  were  added  to 
venality  in  the  authentic  charges  against  the  Curia.  The  Car- 
dinals were  still  further  corrupted,  and  gambling  was  among 
the  lesser  evils  prevalent  among  them.  The  Vatican  under 
Innocent  had  a  domestic  aspect :  he  began  the  practice  of  in- 
viting ladies  officially  to  dinner,  and  at  his  country-house  of  La 
Magliana  he  lived  the  life  of  the  ordinary  middle-aged  layman, 
surrounded  by  his  children.  He  was  not  particularly  interested 
in  art  or  letters,  but  he  went  steadily  on  with  the  adornment  of 
Rome.  He  placed  a  fountain  in  the  piazza  of  St.  Peter,  and  he 
built  the  Villa  Belvedere  in  the  Vatican  gardens.  Harmless  and 
ineffective,  Innocent  VIII.  had  merely  confirmed  the  secular 
character  of  the  Papacy,  and  by  his  open  acknowledgment  of 
family  ties  made  further  developments  possible. 

The  Conclave  which  met  in  1492  to  elect  Innocent's  successor 
was  an  exceptionally  brilliant  assembly,  but  there  were  three 
men  who  stood  out  beyond  the  others,  each  of  them  masters  in 
statecraft,  and  each  gifted  with  marked  personality.  These 
were  Giuliano  della  Rovere,  Ascanio  Sforza,  and  Rodrigo  Borgia. 
Giuliano  was  the  candidate  of  France,  Ascanio  of  his  own  brother, 
the  Duke  of  Milan,  and  Rodrigo  owed  his  strength  to  the  riches 
which  he  had  accumulated  as  Vice-Chancellor.      Seeing  that 


THE  SECULAR  PAPACY  289 

France  and  Milan  could  be  played  off  against  each  other,  Rod- 
rigo  Borgia  set  to  work  to  buy  up  the  Papacy  by  a  judicious 
distribution  of  his  palaces,  his  offices,  and  his  goods.  To  the 
Colonna  Cardinal  he  gave  the  Abbey  of  Subiaco,  to  his  Orsini 
rival  a  Roman  palace,  and  two  villas  ;  for  the  rest  of  the  Cardi- 
nals there  were  gifts  in  due  gradation,  while  Ascanio  Sforza's 
support  was  won  by  a  promise  of  the  post  of  Vice-Chancellor, 
supplemented  by  four  mules  laden  with  gold  and  silver.  Thus 
Rodrigo  became  Alexander  VI.  (1492-1503),  and  the  transaction 
is  characteristic  of  the  man.  To  attempt  an  apology  for  Alex- 
ander's pontificate  is  now  unnecessary  and  impossible — un- 
necessary, because  the  case  for  and  against  him  has  been 
probed  to  the  foundations,  and  impossible,  because  the  principle 
on  which  any  possible  justification  rests  is  in  itself  unjustifiable. 
The  question  is  whether  in  an  age  of  fraud  and  immorality  he 
was  more  or  less  fraudulent  and  immoral  than  other  conspicuous 
examples  of  these  tendencies.  But  the  answer  does  not  dispose 
of  the  charge,  even  if  we  admit  that  there  were  worse  men  than 
he  among  the  rulers  of  Italy,  for  the  accusation  against  him  is 
not  personal,  but  official.  It  is  not  that  he  degraded  himself, 
but  that  he  degraded  the  Papacy.  Whether  the  Borgian  Papacy 
was  an  outrage  on  the  age  or  a  characteristic  example  of  Renais- 
sance State-life — whether  we  regard  it  as  a  catastrophe  or  as 
the  culmination  of  a  decline — the  calamity  lies  in  the  travesty, 
which  it  presents,  of  the  ideal  which  had  given  the  Papacy  its 
magnificent  claim  on  the  mind  of  Europe. 

There  was  no  skeleton  in  the  Borgian  cupboard  in  1492.  It 
was  so  well-known  what  kind  of  a  man  Rodrigo  was  that  Bishop 
Creighton  is  able  to  contend  that  "  the  exceptional  infamy  that 
attaches  to  Alexander  VI.  is  largely  due  to  the  fact  that  he  did 
not  add  hypocrisy  to  his  other  vices  ".  There  was  certainly  no 
reticence  among  his  contemporaries  as  to  his  way  of  life,  neither 
was  there  at  first  much  condemnation.  His  simony  provoked 
scandals,  but  not  his  sensual  vices.  His  family  was  taken  for 
granted  and  his  children  were  treated  with  deference.  He  is 
described  by  a  contemporary  at  the  time  of  his  coronation  as  "  a 
handsome  man  with  a  pleasant  look  and  a  honeyed  tongue,  who 
lures  women  to  love  him,  and  attracts  those  on  whom  he  casts 
his  eyes  more  powerfully  than  a  magnet  draws  iron  "  (Gas- 
parino  of  Verona).  Pius  II.  had  reproved  him  in  his  youth  for 
taking  part  in  an  orgy  in  a  Sienese  garden  at  which  a  young 
Cardinal  was  certainly  out  of  place,  and  "  shame  forbids  mention 
of  all  that  occurred  ".  Since  then  he  had  watched  the  moral 
ideal  of  the  Papacy  decline  through  four  pontificates,  and  life 

19 


290  A  SHOKT  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

had  not  taught  him  moral  restraint.     He  had  two  illegitimate 
children  before  the  year  1473,  when  he  began  his  connection 
with  Vanozza  de  Catarei,  a  "  quiet  and  upright  woman,"  who 
bore  him  three  sons  and  a  daughter.     The  Vanozza  liaison  had 
ended  some  time  before  Alexander's  election,  but  her  children 
were   conspicuous   at  the   Vatican   for  their  beauty  and  their 
princely  education.     The   eldest,  Giovanni,  had  succeeded  his 
half-brother  in  the  duchy  of  Gandia,  which  Rodrigo  had  bought 
for  his  Spanish  son,  who  died  in  1488.     Cesare  was  being  edu- 
cated as  a  priest  and  already  held  many  benefices  which  Sixtus 
IV.  had  bestowed  on  him  in  his  infancy.     Lucrezia  was  already 
beautiful,   with   her  quick  smile  and  her  famous  golden  hair, 
and  Giuffre,  the  youngest,  was  as  yet  a  child  in  1492.     Rodrigo 
was  nothing  if  not  a  devoted  father,  and  he  had  provided  honour- 
ably  for   "la  felice  e  infelice  madre,  Vanozza  Borgia,"  as  she 
describes  herself  in  a  letter  to  Lucrezia.     Rodrigo's  children  are 
individually  important  for  the  great  part  which  they  played  m 
his  policy  and  collectively  as  the  motive  force  which  actuated 
everything  which  he  did.     Their  aggrandisement  was  his   sole 
aim,   and   in   his   passionate   fatherhood   lies   the  reason  why, 
according  to   Gregorius,    "  his   entire   pontificate   shows   not   a 
single  great  idea,  either  in  Church  or  State,  either  as  priest  or 

as  prince ".  ,  •   r  i 

Alexander  first   had   to   pay   his  debts.     The  chief  quarrel 
among  the  Italian  princes,  on  his  accession,  was  between  Milan 
and  Naples.     Milan  was  represented  in  Rome  by  Ascanio  Sforza, 
brother  of  Ludovico  il  Moro,  and  to  Ascanio,  Alexander  owed 
his  election.     Alexander  had  his  own  quarrel  with  Naples  too, 
for  Ferrante   had   pressed   forward  the   sale   to   the  Orsini  of 
certain  territories  belonging  to  Franceschetto  Cib5,  in  the  hope 
that   they  would   be  "  a  bone  in  the  throat  of  the  Pope  with 
which  the  Orsini  might  strangle  him  at  their  desire  ".     Venice, 
Milan    Mantua,   Ferrara,    and  Siena  joined   Alexander's   anti- 
Neapolitan   alliance.     Spain,  too,  adhered  to  it,  for  Alexander 
had  just  confirmed  Ferdinand's  sovereignty  in  the  New  World. 
The   bonds  were  drawn  closer  with  Milan  by  the  marriage  of 
Lucrezia   Borgia  with   Giovanni  Sforza,   lord    of    Pesaro,    and 
twelve  new  Cardinals  were  created  in  order  to  defray  the  ex- 
penses of  her  wedding.     Among  them  were  Cesare  Borgia,  now 
aged  eighteen,  and  Alessandro  Farnese,  brother  of  Giulia,  who 
was  recognised  as  Alexander's  mistress  at  the  time  of  Lucrezia's 
wedding.     The  beauty  of  Giuha,  with  the  hair  "  which  reached 
to  her  feet  and  shone  like  the  sun,"  was  perpetuated  in  one  of 
Finturicchig's  Madonnas,  by  order  of  the  Pope, 


THE  SECULAR  PAPACY  291 

Alexander's  first  Italian  policy  gave  way  in  1494,  before  the 
announcement  of  Charles  VIII. 's  invasion  of  Italy  for  the  con- 
quest of  Naples.  The  astounding  success  of  the  French  army 
terrified  Alexander ;  his  worst  enemy,  Cardinal  della  Rovere, 
was  in  Charles's  camp  ;  the  vacillation  of  Piero  de  Medici  had 
given  Florence  to  Charles  for  an  ally,  and  the  French  King  had 
once  or  twice  mentioned  the  word  Council.  Alexander  there- 
fore turned  from  Milan  to  Naples,  and  married  his  son  Giuffre 
with  some  difficulty  to  Sancia,  daughter  of  Alfonso  II.,  now 
King  of  Naples.  He  dared  not  openly  oppose  France,  so,  ignor- 
ing Naples,  he  pretended  to  look  on  the  expedition  as  a  Crusade 
against  the  Turk.  At  the  same  time  he  disgraced  himself  by 
appealing  to  the  Sultan  to  subsidise  the  papal  army  against 
France,  on  the  plea  that  Charles  if  he  succeeded  would  capture 
Djem,  and  invade  Constantinople  in  his  name.  Bajazet  sent 
40  000  ducats  for  use  against  the  "  crusading  "  forces  of  France. 
It  is  now  known  that  he  sent  another  embassy  at  the  same  time 
promising  a  further  30,000  in  return  for  the  dead  body  of  Djem, 
"  wherewith  your  Highness  may  buy  lands  for  your  sons  ". 

Meanwhile,  the  French  party  among  the  Cardinals  urged 
Charles  to  break  with  the  Pope  and  summon  a  General  Council. 
But  this  line  of  action  did  not  appeal  to  the  King,  who  realised 
that  "  Alexander  might  be  unfit  to  be  Pope,  but  that  he  (Charles) 
was  equally  unfit  to  say  so  "  (Creighton).  Alexander  answered 
the  attack  of  the  hostile  Cardinals  on  his  character  with  logic 
which  was  irrefutable  :  "  Let  slanderers  tell  what  tales  they 
will,  Alexander  is  holier,  or  at  least  as  holy,  as  he  was  at  the 
time  of  his  election  ".  This  was  true  enough,  but  meanwhile 
Charles  had  advanced  to  Rome  without  opposition,  although 
Alexander  had  refused  to  give  him  safe-conduct  through  the 
papal  states.  Charles  finally  entered  Rome  under  the  shelter 
of  an  emergency  peace  and  encamped  on  the  farther  side  of  the 
Tiber.  When  he  left  the  city,  on  January  25,  he  took  with  him 
as  hostages,  Cesare  Borgia  and  Djem.  Charles  was  unlucky 
in  his  hostages.  Cesare  escaped  five  days  later  from  the 
French  camp,  and  thus  proved  the  extent  of  Alexander's  good 
faith.  The  forlorn  Oriental  ended  his  tragic  life  a  month  later, 
and  strangely  enough  by  a  natural  death,  although  the  theory 
that  the  Pope  had  poisoned  him  before  he  left  Rome  was  pro- 
duced as  a  matter  of  course,  and  believed  by  those  who  wished 
to  believe  it. 

The  "  miraculous  "  success  of  the  French  culminated  in  the 
conquest  of  Naples,  and  Savonarola  saw  in  it  the  fulfilment  of 
his  vision  of  Charles,  "  Missus  a  Deo  ".     But  behind  him,  Charles 


292    A  SHOKT  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

left  a  trail  of  suspicion  and  dread,  which  found  expression  in 
Alexander's  league  for  the  expulsion  of  the  French  in  March, 
1495.  The  Pope  had  every  reason  for  opposing  Charles,  who  had 
listened  to  the  truth  about  his  own  character,  who  had  allied 
himself  with  unfriendly  Florence,  and  who  now  threatened  him 
with  that  bugbear  of  the  Papacy,  a  strong  and  united  Naples, 
hostile  to  Rome.  His  feelings  were  shared  by  Ludovico  Sforza, 
now  alarmed  at  the  fire  which  he  had  lighted,  and  painfully 
conscious  of  the  claims  of  Louis  of  Orleans  on  his  duchy  of 
Milan.  The  terror  of  the  lilies  spread  to  Venice,  prompted  by 
fear  for  her  maritime  greatness — to  Spain,  apprehensive  for 
Spanish  Sicily — to  Maximilian,  jealous  as  one  "  preux  cheva- 
lier "  of  the  military  glory  of  another.  In  July,  the  battle  of 
Fornovo  saw  the  end  of  the  vainglorious  Charles  and  his  de- 
moralised army.  His  successes  had  awakened  Italy  from  her 
aesthetic  slumber,  and  the  honour,  such  as  it  is,  of  resisting  the 
"scourge"  is  due  to  Alexander. 

But  the  attempt  to  find  anything  deeper  than  a  coincidence 
of  personal  motives  for  the  combination  of  the  Italian  states 
against  France  fails  when  we  consider  that  Florence,  the  most 
enlightened  of  them  all,  held  aloof  from  it.  A  national  ideal, 
if  Italy  had  been  capable  of  formulating  one,  would  have  found 
its  best  chance  of  .acceptance  in  Florence.  But  the  Florentines 
clung  obstinately  to  their  alliance  with  France,  in  spite  of  all 
Alexander's  efforts  to  detach  them.  The  benefits  which  Charles 
had  promised  them — the  exclusion  of  the  Medici  and  the  reduc- 
tion of  Pisa — seemed  of  greater  importance  than  the  privilege  of 
being  "  Buoni  Italiani ".  Savonarola,  one-sided  politician  as  he 
was,  felt  that  Florentine  liberty  was  a  bigger  cause  than  the 
exclusion  from  Italy  of  the  avenging  foreigner.  Italy,  in  his 
eyes,  was  not  worth  saving  until  the  "  scourge  "  had  fallen  upon 
it.  Alexander's  opposition  to  the  "  chattering  friar  "  was  there- 
fore reasonable  and  deliberate.  He  was  indeed  surprisingly 
patient  with  him  in  the  early  part  of  the  quarrel,  and  bore  him 
no  grudge  for  his  invectives  against  him  as  a  "  broken  iron ". 
He  was  determined  to  keep  the  quarrel  on  a  political  footing — 
a  hard  thing  with  an  enemy  so  fearless  and  deadly  in  his  use  of 
personal  weapons.  In  1496,  he  suspended  him  from  preaching, 
and  when  this  failed  he  bribed  him  with  a  red  hat.  At  the 
same  time,  he  encouraged  the  hostility  of  the  Roman  Domini- 
cans, and  later  of  the  Franciscans,  against  the  friar.  When, 
in  1497,  a  party  hostile  to  Savonarola  arose  in  Florence,  Alex- 
ander took  the  opportunity  of  excommunicating  him,  but  the 
"Burning  of  the  Vanities"  on  Lent  testified  to  the  continued 


THE  SECULAK  PAPACY  293 

strength  of  his  opponent's  hold  on  the  city.  All  the  time  the 
Pope  was  concentrating  on  the  one  object  of  dissociating  Flor- 
ence from  France,  and  when  finally  the  execution  of  Savonarola 
became  a  political  necessity,  Alexander  reluctantly  gave  his 
consent.  He  was  not  responsible  for  his  death,  which  was  due 
to  the  rhetorical  challenge  of  one  of  the  friar's  friends,  but  he 
had  consented  to  it,  and  his  opposition  to  Savonarola's  politics 
had  brought  it  about.  But  it  was  one  of  the  things  which  this 
strange  Pope  always  regretted,  although  it  had  brought  him  an 
immediate  political  advantage,  and  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  it 
delivered  him  from  a  personal  enemy  who  might  have  become 
dangerous  if  the  French  menace  of  a  Council  had  been  put  into 
effect. 

The  interest  of  Alexander  in  resisting  France  was  not  in  any 
sense  national,  for  it  was  reversed  by  the  death  of  the  Duke  of 
Gandia  in  1497.  On  June  14  the  body  of  the  Pope's  eldest 
son  was  thrown  into  the  Tiber  by  two  masked  men,  directed  by 
another  on  horseback.  A  charcoal  burner  who  witnessed  it, 
when  he  was  asked  why  he  did  not  report  it  at  once,  replied 
that  he  had  seen  a  hundred  or  more  bodies  thrown  into  the  river 
in  his  day,  but  never  one  that  had  been  asked  for  again.  The 
circumstances  of  the  Duke  of  Gandia's  death  were  so  mysterious 
that  the  guilt  cannot  be  assigned  with  certainty  to  anyone.  But 
its  political  importance  was  enormous,  for  it  set  at  large  the 
sinister  eflficiency  and  ambition  of  the  Pope's  younger  son, 
Cesare  Borgia.  Alexander  had  loved  Giovanni,  but  he  feared 
Cesare  and  was  dominated  by  him,  to  the  extent  perhaps  of 
condoning  his  fratricide.  At  anyrate  his  grief  for  Giovanni 
spent  itself  in  six  months,  during  which  he  talked  of  reform, 
and  kept  Cesare  at  a  distance.  At  the  time  of  Giovanni's  death, 
he  said  to  the  Cardinals — "We  no  longer  value  the  Papacy  or 
anything  else.  If  we  had  seven  papacies  we  would  give  them 
all  to  restore  him  to  life."  A  year  later,  we  find  him  embarked 
in  fresh  schemes  for  his  children,  this  time  concentrated  on  the 
"dark  designs  "  of  Cesare. 

At  this  period  the  family  chronicle  of  the  Borgias  moves 
rapidly,  and  scandal  rampages  round  the  events.  Lucrezia's 
divorce  from  Giovanni  Sforza  was  a  necessary  first  step  in  the 
change  of  policy  which  was  to  substitute  France  for  Milan  as  the 
family  ally.  Lucrezia  was  too  exquisite  a  prize  to  be  thrown 
away  on  the  policy  of  a  moment.  Moreover,  it  was  possible  to 
annul  the  marriage  and  set  Lucrezia  free  at  the  expense  of 
Giovanni's  pride.  Giovanni  could,  and  did,  retaliate  by  an 
appalling,    but    at    that    time    obvious,    counterstroke    against 


294  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

Lucrezia's  father,  but  the  Italians  of  his  day  preferred  to  laugh 
than  to  condemn,  and  the  joke  against  Giovanni  pleased  those 
who  would  hesitate  to  believe  "  so  great  an  enormity "  of  the 
Pope.  But  "  whatever  may  be  the  truth,"  wrote  the  Venetian 
envoy  in  relating  the  scandal,  "  one  thing  is  certain :  this  Pope 
behaves  in  an  outrageous  and  intolerable  way ".  Six  months 
later,  Lucrezia  was  married  to  Alfonso  of  Biseglia,  "  the  hand- 
somest youth  ever  seen  in  Rome  ".  He  was  the  natural  son  of 
Alfonso  II.  of  Naples,  and  his  hand  brought  the  alliance  of 
Federigo,  the  last  and  most  reputable  of  the  House  of  Aragon, 
who  had  restored  his  dynasty  after  the  withdrawal  of  the  French 
from  Naples. 

In  August,  1498,  Cesare  Borgia  was  dispensed  from  the 
cardinalate  "  for  the  salvation  of  his  soul ".  In  December  he 
went  to  France,  a  magnificent  layman,  to  buy  the  alliance  of 
Louis  XII.  in  order  to  conquer  the  Romagna  with  the  help  of 
French  troops.  With  him  he  carried  a  dispensation  from  his 
father  to  enable  Louis  to  marry  the  desirable  Anne  of  Brittany 
and  to  divorce  his  present  wife  Jeanne  of  France.  Louis  XII., 
in  return,  gave  to  Cesare  a  French  dukedom  and  a  royal  bride. 
"  Le  voil^  due  de  Valentinois,"  say  the  French  historian,  Miche- 
let,  "  avec  une  compagnie  de  cents  lances  Fran^aises,  c'est-^-dire 
le  drapeau  de  la  Fra,nce,  la  terreur  de  nos  lys,  affich^s  h  cot^  des 
clefs  pontificales.  C'^tait  le  livrer  I'ltalie."  In  May,  1499, 
Cesare  married  the  beautiful  Charlotte  dAlbret,  who  lived  with 
him  for  four  months,  loved  him  for  ever,  and  never  saw  him 
again.  Cesare,  the  most  striking  of  the  Borgias,  is  described  as 
a  very  handsome  young  man,  florid  perhaps  and  vulgar,  but 
"a  gallant  youth,"  according  to  Castiglione.  Capello  tells  us 
that  he  had  a  splendid  head,  with  long-shaped  narrow  eyes, 
from  which  a  hard  and  serpentine  glance  seemed  to  shoot  fire. 
His  relations  with  his  father  were  curious.  Widely  different  in 
temperament,  they  shared  only  the  thoroughness  of  Borgian  self- 
seeking.  Both  Alexander  and  Cesare  "did  but  will  a  thing  and  it 
was  done  " :  both  owed  their  successes  to  their  clear  knowledge 
of  what  they  wanted,  and  their  failures  to  the  short  cuts  which 
they  were  obliged  to  take  in  getting  there.  A  chronicler  records 
the  irritation  of  Cesare  at  the  incurable  outspokenness  of  his 
father,  and  in  Florence  a  proverb  was  coined  that  "  II  Papa  non 
facera  mai  quello  che  dicera,  e  il  Valentino  non  dicera  mai 
quello  che  facera  ".  Alexander  was  the  child  of  the  day,  Cesare 
of  the  night,  and  with  the  ascendancy  of  the  son  over  the  father, 
from  the  year  1499,  darkness  lowers  over  the  picture  of  Rome, 
and  revelry  gives  place  to  terror. 


THE  SECULAK  PAPACY  295 

Cesare's  first  exploit  with  his  French  army  in  Romagna  was 
the  capture  of  Imola  and  Forli  from  Caterina  Sforza  in  January, 
1500.  The  Pope's  relations  with  Naples  had  been  disturbed  by 
the  French  alliance,  but  this  did  not  cloud  his  joy  when  he  re- 
ceived his  triumphant  son  in  Rome  in  the  year  of  Jubilee.  He 
laughed  and  cried  at  once,  he  led  Cesare  in  procession  with  the 
captive  Caterina  in  golden  chains,  he  watched  his  hero  kill  six 
bulls  in  the  Piazza,  and  diverted  him  with  gorgeous  spectacles 
and  fabulous  indecencies.  The  news  of  the  capture  of  the 
Sforzas  by  the  French  increased  the  joy  of  the  Borgias,  for  it 
opened  new  vistas  of  conquest  for  Cesare.  Either  as  a  stepping- 
stone  for  further  exploits  in  which  Lucrezia  could  be  a  useful 
decoy,  or  in  gratification  of  a  private  vendetta,  Cesare  found  it 
necessary  to  murder  his  young  brother-in-law  before  he  left 
Rome.  Alexander  hushed  the  afi'air  up  as  far  as  he  could,  but 
Lucrezia  had  loved  Alfonso  and  loudly  lamented  him.  She  was 
sent  away  to  dry  her  tears  or  to  drown  them  in  new  splendours, 
for  a  third  and  greater  destiny  awaited  her.  In  1500  the  Kings 
of  France  and  Spain  formed  a  partition  treaty  for  the  division 
of  Naples.  Alexander  went  to  Naples  to  confirm  the  treaty,  and 
in  his  absence  left  Lucrezia  as  his  regent,  with  a  Council  of 
Cardinals,  in  the  Vatican.  It  was  a  clever  stroke,  for,  in  spite 
of  the  scandal  involved,  it  gave  Lucrezia  a  certain  personal  im- 
portance in  afifairs  which  successfully  overcame  the  pride  of  the 
House  of  Este.  In  1501  Lucrezia  married  Alfonso  d'Este,  and 
her  political  importance  ends  at  the  age  of  twenty-two  in  her 
happy  life  at  the  ducal  Court  of  Ferrara.  The  character  of 
Lucrezia  Borgia  has  emerged  from  four  centuries  of  execration. 
In  spite  of  the  brilliant  and  lurid  setting  of  her  youth,  she  was 
probably  merely  a  tool  of  Alexander  and  Cesare — a  beautiful 
girl  with  the  Borgian  love  of  life  and  a  taste  for  literature  and 
art.  She  was  not  interested  in  the  Borgian  schemes,  in  which 
she  played  a  passive  part,  and  for  politics  she  had  no  particular 
capacity  or  ambition.  She  took  her  morals  from  her  environ- 
ment :  her  married  life  at  Ferrara  was  above  reproach,  and  her 
children  were  admirably  brought  up.  Before  she  left  Rome  two 
children  were  provided  for  by  Alexander,  one  Rodrigo,  an  ille- 
gitimate son  of  Lucrezia,  and  the  other  the  mysterious  "  infans 
Romanus,"  who  is  mentioned  in  one  document  as  the  son  of 
Cesare  and  in  another  as  the  son  of  the  Pope.  Here  was  more 
material  for  scandal,  and  the  utmost  was  made  of  it.  Cesare 
was  busy  waging  war  in  the  Romagna ;  Rimini  and  Pesaro  had 
been  wrested  from  their  lords :  Faenza  held  out  for  six  months 
in  the  name  of  its  boy  ruler,  Astorre  Manfredi ;  but  his  body  was 


296  A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

found  one  day  in  the  Tiber.  Cesare  was  Duke  of  Romagna,  and 
a  series  of  picturesque  crimes  had  made  him  the  hero- villain  of 
Italy.  As  Lucrezia  passed  through  the  Romagna  on  her  wedding 
journey  she  found  it  necessary,  in  passing  through  many  cities, 
to  wash  her  hair  as  an  excuse  for  retirement.  But  the  rule  of 
Cesare  Borgia  was  popular  on  the  whole,  and  Machiavelli's  ad- 
miration for  him  has  considerable  justification  on  that  account. 
In  Rome  meanwhile  the  fear  of  the  Borgias  grew,  and  the 
death  of  the  richest  of  the  Cardinals  excited  further  sinister 
suspicions.  Poisonings  were  not  as  frequent  under  the  Borgias 
as  contemporaries  are  anxious  to  make  us  believe,  but  since  in 
one  case,  that  of  Cardinal  Michiel,  the  guilt  of  Alexander  can  be 
all  but  proved,  it  is  not  unreasonable  to  suspect  him  of  repeat- 
ing the  profitable  expedient.  Two  further  stains  on  Cesare's 
political  reputation — the  assassination  of  Giovanni  da  Fermo  by 
his  nephew  in  the  name  of  Cesare,  and  a  treacherous  attack  on 
Urbino — deepened  the  universal  panic.  "  The  dead  of  night 
covered  all  things,"  and  the  fatal  luck  of  the  Borgias  never 
seemed  to  fail. 

But  the  end  was  not  far  off.  The  arrival  of  Louis  XII.  in 
Italy  in  1502  was  the  signal  which  drew  the  enemies  of  Cesare 
together.  He  had  grown  suspicious  of  his  captains,  who  com- 
plained of  him  to  the  French  King.  The  duke  had  been  alto- 
gether too  active  and  successful  in  Romagna  to  please  his  former 
patron,  and  Louis  was  irritated  by  his  attitude  towards  Florence. 
The  presence  of  the  French,  therefore,  put  heart  into  the  dis- 
contented condottieri  and  rallied  the  dispossessed  lords  of 
Romagna.  Cesare's  coup  d'etat  at  Sinigaglia  was  the  last  of  his 
great  crimes.  He  lured  the  four  chief  condottieri  to  his  camp, 
professing  to  have  pardoned  their  temporary  lapse  from  allegi- 
ance. Oliverotto  and  Vitellozzo  were  strangled  on  the  spot,  after 
dinner ;  the  two  Orsini  a  few  days  later.  Alexander  meanwhile 
seized  Cardinal  Orsini,  who  died  conveniently  in  prison,  and  laid 
hold  of  the  family  castles.  Meanwhile,  the  partition  treaty  of 
Naples  had  broken  down,  and,  to  the  intense  relief  of  Alexander, 
the  French  were  expelled  from  Naples.  "  If  the  Lord  had  not 
put  discord  between  France  and  Spain,  where  should  we  be  ?  " 
was  the  remark  of  the  Pope,  who  had  seen  himself  between  two 
fires.  A  network  of  new  intrigues  with  France,  with  Maximilian, 
with  Spain,  and  with  Venice  was  spread  across  Europe  for  the 
further  aggrandisement  of  the  insatiable  Cesare,  when  the  ac- 
cident of  death  brought  the  Borgian  fortunes  to  a  collapse.  One 
night  in  August,  1503,  Alexander  and  Cesare  were  both  taken  ill 
after  dining  with  Cardinal  Adrian  in  the  Borgo  Nuovo.     They 


THE  SECULAR  PAPACY  297 

were  all  three  struck  with  fever,  and  on  August  18  the  Pope 
died.  Of  course  people  said  that  he  was  poisoned  with  a  potion 
which  he  had  prepared  for  Cardinal  Adrian,  but  the  medical 
evidence  disposes  of  the  suspicion.  Alexander  had  lived  too 
abnormally  to  be  accredited  with  an  ordinary  death,  and  yet  it 
is  impossible  to  feel  that  he  really  rises  to  the  height  of  villainy 
at  which  posterity  has  placed  him.  He  was  too  exuberant  and 
ingenuous  to  live  up  to  the  Machiavellian  ideal  which  was  ful- 
filled in  his  son.  He  liked  to  be  pleasantly  unpleasant,  and  he 
trod  lightly  the  path  of  treachery  and  evil.  But  if  we  exonerate 
him  from  the  deepest  guilt  he  must  also  forfeit  the  admiration 
which  we  cannot  withhold  from  daring  criminality.  The  modern 
estimate  of  Alexander  paints  him  less  black  than  formerly,  but 
it  ranks  him  lower  in  the  scale  of  sinners.  His  crimes  of  sensu- 
ality lack  the  dignity  of  mental  wickedness  ;  there  is  no  glamour 
in  indecency,  and  his  Vatican  orgies  lack  the  inspired  touch  of 
splendid  sin. 

Alexander's  rule  in  Rome  deteriorated  as  his  pontificate 
wore  on.  "  Never  was  Rome  so  full  of  criminals,"  says  Cardinal 
iEgidius ;  "  never  was  the  multitude  of  informers  and  robbers 
so  audacious.  People  could  neither  leave  the  gates  of  the  city, 
nor  dwell  within  it.  To  own  money  or  valuable  property  was 
equal  to  high  treason.  There  was  no  protection  either  in  house, 
sleeping-room,  or  tower.  Justice  was  effaced.  Money,  power, 
and  lust  governed  everything."  And  yet  the  author  of  all  the 
trouble  was  Alexander  of  the  "joyous  nature".  He  was 
assiduous  in  his  adoration  of  the  Virgin,  regular  in  his  devotions, 
interested  in  sending  missionaries  to  America,  and  the  origina- 
tor, it  is  said,  of  the  Angelus,  that  most  poetic  of  Catholic 
practices.  It  was  the  extreme  paradox  of  an  age  of  contra- 
dictions, in  which  religion  had  grown  apart  from  life,  and  the 
Chxirch  was  one  with  the  world. 

All  that  the  Borgias  had  built  up  in  the  ten  years  of 
Alexander's  pontificate  fell  to  pieces  on  his  death.  Cesare  was 
ill  and  could  not  rally  his  forces.  Pius  III.,  the  best  candidate 
he  could  secure  to  the  Papacy,  lived  only  twenty-six  days,  and 
was  succeeded  by  Giuliano  della  Rovere,  Cesare's  bitterest 
opponent.  Julius  II.  (1503-1513)  tried  to  keep  on  friendly  terms 
with  him,  but  he  was  determined  to  destroy  his  power  in  the 
Romagna.  There  was  not  room  for  two  such  men  in  Italy,  and 
Cesare  was  imprisoned  when  he  refused  to  give  up  his  castles. 
On  his  release  he  was  used  as  a  condottiere,  but  soon  imprisoned 
again.  In  Spain  he  escaped  from  a  third  captivity,  and  died 
bravely  in  battle  on  March   12,   1507.      The   value    of   Cesare 


298  A  SHOET  HISTOBY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

Borgia's  career  in  history  was  that  he  defined  and  accentuated 
the  tendencies  of  the  age.  Machiavelli  used  him  as  a  foundation 
on  which  to  build  his  ideal  state,  in  which  success  is  substituted 
for  ethics.  The  mediaeval  Papacy  was  the  great  symbol  of  the 
oneness  of  religion  and  power.  In  theory  it  stood  for  the  spirit 
of  world-wide  love  as  opposed  to  the  instinct  of  national  hate. 
In  becoming  a  secular  kingdom  the  Papacy  lost  its  symbolical 
significance,  and  in  the  story  of  the  Borgias  we  see  the  result. 


CHAPTER  XXV 

JULIUS  n.  AND  LEO  X. :  THE  PAPACY  AMONG  THE 
DYNASTIES,  a.d.  1603-1521 

JULIUS  II.  came  to  the  throne  with  a  fixed  aim,  and  a  mind 
in  tune  with  it.  He  could  therefore  afford  to  "be  the 
slave  of  every  one  "  provided  that  he  could  achieve  his  end. 
In  this  spirit  he  made  the  alliance  with  France  in  1504  against 
Venice.  He  must  be  lord  of  the  Romagna  at  all  costs.  With 
Cesare  Borgia  out  of  the  way,  Venice  was  his  chief  danger. 
Louis  XII.,  less  clear-sighted,  did  not  forsee  that  in  helping  to 
restore  the  Romagna  to  the  Papacy  he  was  creating  the  power 
which  should  destroy  the  schemes  of  France  in  Italy.  The 
Pope's  first  negotiations  against  Venice  ended  in  a  clever  peace, 
which  enabled  Julius  to  keep  what  he  had  won,  and  left  the 
future  conveniently  insecure  for  his  foes.  The  triumph  was  all 
the  greater  considering  that  France  had  already  withdrawn  her 
support,  and  absorbed  herself  in  other  diplomatic  interests. 

Julius  had  too  much  to  do  to  allow  the  peace  of  Italy  to 
endure,  and  the  next  step  in  the  making  of  his  kingdom  was  an 
attack  on  the  papal  vicars  of  Perugia  and  Bologna.  The  two 
cities  had  long  ago  forgotten  their  ecclesiastical  allegiance,  and 
the  ruling  families  regarded  themselves  as  independent  lords. 
The  Baglioni  of  Perugia  were  tyrannical  and  unpopular;  the 
Bentivogli  of  Bologna  were  autocratic  but  beloved.  Both  cities 
fell  before  the  sudden  attack  of  the  Pope.  Perugia  was  held 
without  much  difficulty,  but  Bologna  was  a  perpetual  trouble. 
For  the  moment,  however,  Julius  had  made  himself  feared,  and 
with  an  eye  still  towards  Venice,  he  took  up  the  threads  of 
diplomacy,  and  began  to  weave  the  ruin  of  the  great  sea  power. 

The  league  of  Cambria  in  1508  was  the  result  of  the  accumu- 
lated selfishness  of  the  states  of  Europe,  skilfully  manipulated 
by  the  craft  of  Julius  II.  It  was  signed  by  representatives  of 
France  and  of  the  Empire,  but  it  included  in  its  schedule  of 
benefits  the  interests  of  the  Pope,  the  King  of  Aragon,  Hungary, 
Savoy,  Ferrara  and  Mantua.  Venice  was  called  upon  to  meet 
the  combined  attack  of   all  her  enemies  and  rivals.     At  the 

299 


300  A  SHOET  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

battle  of  Vaila  she  was  defeated,  and  the  humiliating  terras 
imposed  on  her  were  devised  to  ruin  her  trade  for  ever.  Julius 
followed  up  the  victory  of  the  league  by  an  outrageous  course  of 
ecclesiastical  bullying.  He  refused  to  remove  the  Interdict 
until  a  quarrel  with  Louis  XII.  and  dissatisfaction  with 
Maximilian  forced  him  to  do  bo,  and  then  only  on  terms  of 
uttermost  submission.  The  peace,  which  was  not  signed  until 
February,  1510,  gave  very  little  satisfaction  to  either  side:  it 
was  frankly  a  concession  on  both  sides  to  necessity.  Julius 
followed  up  the  envoys'  act  of  submission  with  apologetic 
remarks.  The  Doge  left  on  record  a  formal  protest  against  the 
terms,  disavowing  their  binding  character  on  the  ground  that  he 
had  acted  "through  violence  and  fear". 

The  Pope  described  the  document  as  a  "  dagger  in  the  heart 
of  the  French  King".  It  marks  the  end  of  the  preliminary 
period  and  the  beginning  of  the  serious  business  of  his  reign. 
The  territories  which  he  had  regained  from  Venice,  added  to 
those  previously  taken  from  Cesare  and  from  the  papal  vicars, 
already  formed  the  kernel  of  the  strong  middle  kingdom  which 
was  to  prevent  for  ever  the  formation  of  a  French  kingdom  in 
Italy  uniting  Milan  and  Naples  in  one  coherent  whole.  Un- 
fortunately for  Julius,  the  "dagger"  miscarried.  He  was  not 
well  served  by  his  generals,  or  rather,  he  trusted  in  his  own 
amazing  energy  to  supply  the  defects  of  his  commanders.  He 
became  a  warrior,  grew  a  soldier's  beard,  and  cultivated  the 
language  of  the  camp.  The  fashionable  military  oaths  of  his 
day  had  always  come  to  him  readily,  and  the  transformation 
was  successful  enough.  The  campaign  against  Ferrara  opened 
hostilities  with  France.  There  were  ecclesiastical  claims  on  the 
province  which  afiforded  a  pretext,  the  real  cause  being  the  close 
alliance  of  its  Duke  with  the  King  of  France,  which  made  it  an 
act  of  open  hostility  against  Louis  XIL  A  further  cause  lay  in 
Duke  Alfonso's  salt  mines,  which  had  unwisely  competed  with 
the  papal  mines  at  Cerria.  The  savage  bull  against  Alfonso  was 
the  measure  of  the  Pope's  martial  vigour.  Julius  owed  every- 
thing to  his  impetuosity  and  nothing  to  his  discretion.  He  had 
counted  on  the  Swiss,  but  they  had  failed  him  at  every  point. 
His  able  Swiss  agent.  Cardinal  Schinner,  could  not  restrain  them 
from  accepting  French  bribes.  Without  their  co-operation  the 
Venetian  fleet  could  not  succeed  in  the  attack  which  had  been 
planned  on  Genoa.  A  fatal  habit  of  using  bad  generals  was 
still  more  disastrous  to  the  fortunes  of  Julius.  The  Marquis  of 
Mantua  and  the  beloved  Cardinal  Alidosi  were  both  suspected 
traitors :  at  Bologna,  where  Julius  fixed  his  head-quarters,  these 


JULIUS  II.  AND  LEO  X.  301 

generals  were  said  to  be  in  communication  with  the  French 
commander  Chaumont.  Only  the  vacillation  of  the  French 
King  saved  the  papal  forces  from  utter  disaster.  Louis  XII. 
allowed  the  moment  for  a  vigorous  counter-offensive  to  pass  by. 
The  Pope's  rashness  seemed  to  imply  a  reserve  of  power,  and 
the  French  King  failed  to  appreciate  that  willingness  to  take 
*'  oflf-chances  "  which  is  so  characteristic  of  Julius.  The  sudden 
arrival  of  Spanish  and  Venetian  reinforcements  for  Julius  saved 
him  from  capitulation,  but  the  defections  of  his  generals  made 
a  direct  attack  on  Ferrara  impossible.  Accordingly,  in  the 
middle  of  winter,  January,  1511,  he  took  the  field  himself  and 
laid  siege  to  Mirandola,  the  strongly  fortified  outpost  of  Ferrara, 
which  was  held  by  the  Amazon-daughter  of  Trivulzio,  the 
French  general.  Julius  submerged  his  ecclesiastical  personality 
in  the  life  of  the  camp.  He  put  heart  into  the  soldiers  and 
became  the  "  bon  camarade "  of  the  Venetian  generals.  He 
threatened  the  beleaguered  town  with  awful  penalties.  When  at 
last  its  brave  defence  was  broken  down,  he  entered  it  through  a 
hole  in  the  wall,  and  received  the  submission  of  the  splendid 
duchess  as  one  great  soldier  from  another.  He  was  a  merciful 
conqueror,  and  he  sent  the  dispossessed  duchess  away  with  an 
honourable  escort,  establishing  in  her  place  her  nephew,  who  was 
among  his  own  supporters. 

Successful  as  he  had  been,  it  was  obviously  impossible  for 
Julius  to  remain  at  the  head  of  his  forces  in  person,  and  he  had 
neither  money,  men,  nor  generals  to  carry  on  the  campaign. 
But  peace  was  equally  impossible  on  the  terms  proposed  by  the 
Bishop  of  Gurk,  the  Imperial  Minister,  in  the  name  of  France 
and  Maximilian.  In  the  renewal  of  war  which  followed,  Miran- 
dola was  recaptured  by  the  father  of  the  duchess.  The  Benti- 
vogli  were  restored  to  Bologna  with  the  utmost  ease — the  town 
had  never  submitted  with  grace  to  the  Pope's  rule,  and  the  papal 
governor,  Alidosi,  had  been  both  disloyal  to  his  master  and  un- 
popular with  the  citizens.  The  murder  of  Alidosi  by  the  Pope's 
nephew  swamped  the  political  misfortunes  of  Julius  in  private 
grief.  Julius  had  loved  Alidosi,  knowing  him  to  be  untrue ;  he 
vowed  vengeance  on  the  Duke  of  Urbino,  who  may  have  vainly 
hoped  to  play  the  part  of  Cesare  in  his  uncle's  court.  Three 
days  later,  Julius  received  him  back  into  favour,  and  owned 
that  Alidosi  was  worthless,  and  his  death  a  good  riddance. 
Such  revulsions  of  feeling  seem  to  have  been  characteristic  of 
him,  as  the  familiar  story  of  his  relations  with  Michelangelo 
bears  out. 

The  psychical   moment   had   arrived   for   the    outbreak   of 


302  A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

ecclesiastical  opposition.  Stifled  by  the  noise  of  battle,  the  rumble 
of  the  reform  movement  had  not  been  silent  during  the  earlier 
years  of  the  pontificate,  and  it  now  broke  out  under  Cardinal 
Carrajal  in  the  clamour  for  a  council.  The  Council  of  Pisa 
which  now  opened  had  little  chance  of  attracting  much  atten- 
tion in  a  Europe  so  entirely  absorbed  in  dynastic  moves  and 
counter-moves.  No  age  was  less  interested  in  religion  than  that 
which  preceded  the  Reformation.  The  older  reform  movements 
had  become  discredited,  and  the  classical  Renaissance  had  won 
over  its  natural  leaders,  and  by  its  indifference  rather  than  its 
opposition  to  religion,  culture  had  replaced  dogma  as  the  focus 
of  intellectual  interest.  If  the  Council  of  Pisa  was  still-born, 
so  was  the  outbreak  of  Roman  democracy  under  Pompeo  Colonna, 
which  occurred  in  the  summer  of  1511,  during  a  serious  illness 
from  which  Julius  II.  unexpectedly  recovered.  The  strong  will 
of  Julius  could  override  obstacles  which  a  more  sensitive  mind 
might  have  combated  with  less  success.  He  simply  had  no  time 
to  attend  to  them,  and  consequently  he  made  them  seem  unim- 
portant. For  since  he  had  left  Bologna  Julius  had  not  paused 
in  his  designs  on  France.  He  was  at  work  consolidating  the 
opposition  which  crystallised  in  July,  1511,  into  the  Holy  League. 
Arrayed  against  France  with  the  Pope  were  Spain,  Venice,  Eng- 
land, and  the  Empire.  Louis  on  his  side  had  the  ecclesiastical 
opposition,  but  Henry  VIII.  had  brought  discredit  on  this  party 
by  ascribing  its  activities  to  the  personal  animosity  of  the  rebel 
Cardinals. 

The  French  successes  against  Bologna,  which  had  followed 
the  Pope's  victories,  were  largely  due  to  the  inactivity  of  the 
Spanish  forces,  who  were  under  orders  to  do  as  little  as  possible. 
The  battle  of  Ravenna  in  April,  1512,  was  a  decisive  victory  for 
France,  but  the  death  of  the  three  brilliant  French  generals 
rendered  it  abortive.  Venice  and  Maximilian  combined  with 
the  Swiss  to  drive  out  the  French,  and  by  August,  1512,  the 
question  of  the  disposal  of  Milan  was  brought  before  the  Con- 
gress of  Mantua.  Each  member  of  the  League  had  its  own  views 
for  the  Lombard  duchy,  with  the  result  that  the  weakest  claim- 
ant was  the  most  successful.  The  influence  of  the  Swiss  was 
responsible  for  the  award  of  the  duchy  to  Massimiliano  Sforza, 
a  weak  prince,  who  was  likely  to  be  an  inoffensive  neighbour. 
He  was  also  the  candidate  of  the  Pope,  who  preferred  him  to 
the  other  nominee,  Charles,  grandson  of  Maximilian  and  of 
Ferdinand,  whose  future  importance  was  not  likely  to  recommend 
him  in  the  eyes  of  Julius. 

Julius  had  succeeded  in  ridding  himself  of  French  interven- 


JULIUS  XL  AND  LEO  X.  303 

tion,  but  he  had  still  to  reckon  with  the  Spaniards  before  he 
could  feel  secure  in  his  predominance  in  Italy.  He  could  not, 
however,  quarrel  with  Spain  until  Florence  had  been  shaken  in 
the  neutrality  to  which  she  clung  with  such  irritating  tenacity. 
The  last  round  of  the  contest  consisted,  therefore,  in  an  invasion 
of  Tuscany  by  the  Spaniards,  headed  by  the  two  Medici,  the 
overthrow  of  the  Florentine  constitution,  and  the  restoration  of 
Medici  rule.  Julius  II.  failed  to  recognise  that  he  had  fallen 
out  of  the  frying-pan  into  the  fire.  Florence,  neutral  and  even 
friendly  to  France,  was  less  dangerous  than  Florence  allied  to 
Spain. 

The  one  good  friend  which  the  League  had  brought  to  Julius 
was  Maximilian,  but  the  picturesque  Emperor  was  disqualified 
by  his  temperament  from  usefulness  as  an  ally.  Both  Maxi- 
milian and  Ferdinand  opposed  the  Italian  policy  of  Julius  :  the 
Emperor  had  his  own  claims  on  Ferrara.  which  the  Pope  disre- 
garded. Ferdinand  was  afraid  of  the  growing  power  of  Julius, 
and  declared  that  "  no  power  in  Italy  should  help  him  to  take 
Ferrara,  and  make  of  the  Duke  of  Urbino  a  second  Cesare  Borgia  ". 
On  the  last  point  he  misjudged  the  Pope ;  Julius  had  not  the 
desire,  nor  his  nephew  the  ability,  to  reproduce  the  relationship 
between  Alexander  VI.  and  his  son.  Julius  used  his  nephew  as 
a  convenient  instrument  with  which  to  carry  out  his  schemes 
for  the  Papacy,  and  there  was  little  trace  of  personal  feeling  in 
the  relationship  between  the  two.  The  nepotism  of  Julius 
sprang  from  his  politics,  and  not  from  his  passions.  His  con- 
temporaries, appreciating  the  impersonal  ends  for  which  he 
worked,  and  contrasting  them  with  the  baseness  of  Alexander's 
ambitions,  thought  the  policy  of  Julius  more  noble  than  it 
really  was.  His  achievement  was  slight,  for  he  died  before  he 
had  made  it  good,  and  his  triumphs  melted  away  before  he  had 
consolidated  them.  His  death,  in  February,  1513,  made  a  deep 
impression  in  Rome,  which  was  shown  by  the  unusual  restraint 
of  the  mob.  The  sudden  cessation  of  his  marvellous  energy 
stunned  the  men  round  him,  and  it  seemed  as  if  the  world  had 
stopped  with  him.  What  he  had  actually  done  for  the  Papacy 
was  to  give  it  a  place  among  the  dynasties,  and  save  it  through 
the  stormy  years  to  come  by  reviving  its  political  importance. 

Of  Julius,  as  of  so  many  of  his  great  contemporaries,  it  is 
true  to  say  that  the  world  owes  more  to  the  expression  of  his 
ideals  in  art  than  to  the  ideals  themselves,  so  imperfectly  carried 
out  in  his  career.  As  the  patron  of  Bramante  and  Michelangelo 
he  could  pour  forth  his  splendid  energy  in  the  adornment  of 
Rome,   g.n(J  leave   a   monument   to  himself  greater  and  more 


304  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

enduring  than  his  conquests.  He  had  struggled  to  make  the 
Papacy  felt  in  Europe,  but  his  schemes  fell  to  pieces  with  his 
death,  while  his  mightiness  lives  on  in  the  masterpieces  which 
it  undoubtedly  inspired. 

In  the  conclave  which  met  to  appoint  Julius'  successor,  the 
usual  strife  of  parties  was  overruled  by  the  general  longing  for 
rest  and  ease.  The  older  Cardinals  wanted  a  venerable  man  of 
peace,  while  the  younger  ones  looked  for  a  young  and  magnifi- 
cent person,  free  from  martial  ambition,  and  unlikely  to  trouble 
the  college  with  strenuous  political  activities.  In  the  election 
of  Giovanni  de'  Medici  at  the  age  of  thirty-eight,  the  counsel  of 
the  younger  men  prevailed.  Young,  tolerant,  and  splendid,  Leo 
X.  expressed  in  his  personality  the  fulfilment  of  Renaissance 
aspiration.  He  had  had  a  long  training  in  the  particular  kind 
of  knowledge  of  the  world  which  made  a  successful  ecclesiastical 
prince.  He  had  natural  qualities  of  mind  and  temperament 
which  ensured  the  sympathy  of  his  contemporaries.  He  further 
inherited  the  Medici  tradition  of  cultured  magnificence,  which 
impressed  the  world  around  him  and  created  an  atmosphere  of 
easy  well-being  which  delighted  his  fellow- Cardinals  with  its 
promise  of  a  future  of  golden  leisure.  The  "  wise  "  son  of 
Lorenzo  the  Magnificent  was  a  many-sided  person,  and  the  court 
which  surrounded  him  as  Pope  was  brilliant  and  heterogeneous. 
He  combined  a  scholar's  passion  for  antiquity  with  the  genial- 
ity and  love  of  life  which  made  him  an  excellent  boon  companion. 
It  would  be  difficult  to  say  which  he  loved  best,  a  day's  hunting 
or  a  learned  discussion.  He  seemed  to  be  equally  capable  of 
appreciating  the  coarse  buff"ooneries  of  Fra  Mariano  and  the 
delicate  beauty  of  Raphael's  inspiration.  The  religious  nature 
of  his  office  hardly  seems  to  have  dawned  on  the  "  Athenian  " 
Pope.  His  attitude  towards  Christianity,  like  that  of  the  men 
about  him,  was  chiefly  negative  :  Christ  seemed  so  much  less 
important  than  Plato,  and  the  Gospel  narrative  supplemented 
the  legends  of  Greece  as  a  quarry  for  the  material  of  artistry. 
We  have  to  look,  for  the  importance  of  Leo's  pontificate,  at  the 
personal  aspect  rather  than  the  political  forces  at  work.  It  is 
in  the  character  of  his  court,  the  efl'ect  of  his  aesthetic  and  his 
social  influence,  above  all,  in  his  family  projects,  that  Leo  X. 
leaves  his  mark  on  papal  history.  His  political  ambitions,  as 
compared  with  those  of  Julius,  were  subordinate  ;  they  were 
most  successful  when  they  were  least  explicit.  He  was  better 
at  juggling  with  other  men's  schemes  than  at  constructing 
policies  of  his  own.  The  advancement  of  the  Medici  was  the 
one  constant  factor  in  his  diplomacy,  and  for  this  he  was  pre- 


JULIUS  11.  AND  LEO  X.  305 

pared  to  forego  the  larger  game  which  Julius  had  played  among 
the  powers  and  to  play  oflF  the  invaders  of  Italy  against  each 
other  so  that  Florence  should  share  the  spoils  of  the  stronger  or 
receive  the  bribes  of  the  weaker  combatant. 

It  soon  became  clear  that  the  Papacy  was  to  be  run  on 
Medicean  principles.  "  Let  us  enjoy  the  Papacy,  since  God  has 
given  it  to  us,"  are  the  words  which  Leo  is  reported  to  have  said 
to  his  brother  Giuliano,  soon  after  his  election.  At  his  corona- 
tion, in  April,  1513,  splendour,  adulation,  and  culture  were 
combined  to  announce  that  the  glories  of  Florence  had  come  to 
crown  the  magnificence  of  Rome.  A  triumphal  arch  bore  the 
inscription  :  "  Once  Venus  reigned,  then  Mars,  now  comes  the 
reign  of  Pallas  ".  "  I,  Venus,  will  always  reign,"  was  the  im- 
proved version  placed  by  a  goldsmith  on  a  statue  of  Venus  in 
the  next  street.  But  the  reign  of  Pallas  was  at  first  particularly 
obvious.  Leo  was  called  upon  at  once  to  face  the  political 
situation,  and  he  did  bo  resolutely  in  the  interests  of  peace. 
He  joined  the  renewed  Holy  League  against  France,  because 
France  at  that  moment  was  planning  an  invasion  of  North  Italy. 
But  when,  after  her  defeat  at  the  battle  of  Novara,  France 
ceased  to  be  the  aggressor,  Leo  showed  plainly  that  he  had  no 
desire  to  crush  her,  since  she  could  be  useful  to  him  as  a  foil  to 
Spain.  Before  Julius  died,  he  had  opened  the  Lateran  Council 
in  response  to  the  feeling  which  had  produced  the  rebel  Council 
of  Lyons.  The  sixth  session  of  the  Council  was  in  full  swing  in 
the  first  months  of  Leo's  reign,  and  he  made  use  of  it  now  as  a 
means  of  reconciliation  with  France.  The  opposition  Council 
of  Lyons  was  prepared  to  give  in,  and  the  Cardinals  Carrajal 
and  Sanseverno  who  had  supported  it  were  as  ready  to  submit 
to  their  old  comrade  as  he  was  to  accept  their  submission.  Their 
forgiveness  was  half-way  to  the  pacification.  The  submission 
of  Louis  XII.  sealed  Leo's  efforts  as  a  peace-maker :  it  did  not 
add  to  his  reputation  as  Head  of  Christendom,  and  neither  on 
the  whole  did  the  further  proceedings  of  the  Council.  For  Leo 
had  pardoned  Louis  on  the  dangerous  ground  that  his  quarrel 
with  Julius  was  a  personal  one.  Once  admitted  that  the  Pope 
could  quarrel  as  man  to  man  with  a  prince  who  set  his  authority 
at  defiance,  the  fabric  of  the  spiritual  supremacy  was  under- 
mined. It  would  not  be  long  before  the  ingenuous  admission 
of  Leo  would  be  turned  against  the  Papacy,  and  it  would  be 
possible  for  the  other  side  to  insist  that  ecclesiastical  duels 
should  be  fought  on  secular  ground  alone.  In  other  directions 
Leo  showed  a  dangerous  laxity  in  enforcing  his  prerogative. 
Free  discussion  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul  was  a  fashion  in 

20 


306  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

intellectual;  circles'm  Leo's  day,  and  the  Pope's  denunciation  of 
this  ecclesiastical  danger  was  so  mild  that  it  seemed  to  show  too 
plainly  his  sympathy  with  the  offenders.  His  Reform  Edict 
was  useless  by  reason  of  the  same  defect.  Such  efforts  were  not 
in  keeping  with  the  character  of  Leo.  He  was  a  man  of  the 
world,  and  he  had  cultivated  the  gentle  cynicism  which  he  in- 
herited from  his  father.  Too  worldly  to  condemn  worldiness 
and  too  discreet  to  condone  it,  he  soothed  the  reformers  with 
half- measures  and  chid  the  offenders  with  a  smile. 

Having  settled  the  affairs  of  France,  Leo  inaugurated  his 
family  policy  by  creating  two  young  Cardinals  in  the  Borgian 
manner,  for  family  reasons  alone.  Giulio  de'  Medici  was  the 
illegitimate  son  of  Giuliano,  brother  of  Lorenzo  the  Magnificent. 
Leo  took  great  pains  to  establish  his  legitimacy  by  a  legal 
fiction,  for,  unlike  Alexander  VI.,  he  was  always  careful  to  keep 
on  the  right  side  of  prejudice  in  such  matters.  Nobody  believed 
in  Giulio's  legitimacy,  but,  in  some  way,  it  shocked  public 
opinion  less  when  it  was  screened  by  a  lie  than  when  it  was 
openly  declared.  Giulio  was  able  and  unscrupulous,  and  he 
served  his  cousin  well  in  the  political  field ;  his  good  looks  and 
distinguished  bearing  made  him  an  ornamental  figure  which 
Raphael  loved  to  perpetuate.  The  other  young  Cardinal,  Inno- 
cenzo  Cybo,  was  Leo's  nephew,  and  some  scandal  attended  his 
creation  by  reason  of  his  youth,  for  he  was  only  twenty-one,  and 
his  appointment  was  a  flagrant  assertion  of  Leo's  family  policy. 
In  the  same  year,  Giuliano  de'  Medici — rightly  described  by 
Lorenzo  as  his  "  good  "  son,  in  contradistinction  to  the  "  wise  " 
Giovanni  and  the  "foolish"  Piero — was  brought  to  Rome  with 
great  honour,  created  a  Roman  baron,  and  established  in  great 
splendour  at  the  Pope's  right  hand.  The  reason  for  this  move 
was  that  Leo  saw  in  his  brother's  honesty  an  obstacle  to  his  own 
schemes  for  Florence.  Giuliano  would  be  an  admirable  figure- 
head for  the  Medici  House,  but  the  young  Lorenzo,  son  of  Piero, 
was  a  more  promising  instrument  for  the  government  by  corrup- 
tion and  craft  which  was  the  basis  of  Medici  power  in  Florence. 
Giuliano,  meanwhile,  was  useful  in  his  way,  as  Cesare  had  been 
to  Alexander,  as  an  eligible  bachelor  whose  hand  could  be 
bought  by  a  promise  of  friendship  to  the  Pope,  supported  by  a 
substantial  dowry.  After  various  negotiations,  Giuliano  was 
married  to  Filiberta  of  Savoy,  was  made  Duke  of  Nemours,  and, 
for  a  moment,  he  became  the  link  which  held  the  Papacy  in 
alliance  with  France.  But  before  the  death  of  Giuliano  in  1516, 
the  link  had  already  failed  to  hold. 

One  of  the  articles  of  Leo's  political  faith  was  that  "  when 


JULIUS  II.  AND  LEO  X.  307 

you  have  made  a  league  with  any  prince,  you  ought  not,  on  that 
account,  to  cease  from  treating  with  his  adversary  ".  As  soon 
as  Louis  XII.  had  submitted  to  the  Papacy,  the  Holy  League 
began  to  break  up,  and  Leo  put  his  precept  into  practice  by 
negotiating  with  each  separate  State,  and  entering  into  secret 
understandings  with  France,  the  Swiss,  Ferdinand,  and  Venice. 
In  1515  events  began  to  move,  when  Francis  I.  and  Charles  V. 
came  on  the  scene  in  France  and  Spain  respectively.  Francis  was 
at  that  time  the  more  dangerous  of  the  two,  and  Leo  accordingly 
made  the  alliance  which  Giuliano's  marriage  was  to  seal.  But 
the  young  King  of  France  was  not  prepared  to  conquer  Naples 
for  his  Medici  uncle-in-law,  and,  the  marriage  notwithstanding, 
Leo  arranged  a  league  against  France,  pivoting  on  England,  in 
consequence  of  which  the  English  minister,  Wolsey,  became  a 
Cardinal.  In  August,  1515,  the  great  battle  of  Marignano  re- 
vealed to  Italy  the  might  of  the  new  chivalry  of  France  under 
the  influence  of  the  chevalier-king.  Leo's  skill  and  lack  of 
scruple  was  never  better  shown  than  in  the  peace  which  he 
made  at  Bologna  with  Francis  in  the  following  December.  With 
Florence  ever  uppermost  in  his  mind,  he  undertook  to  restore 
his  Ferrarese  conquests  to  Francis  in  return  for  leave  to  seize 
the  lands  of  the  Duke  of  Urbino.  For  this  wanton  plan  of 
aggression  Leo  could  plead  a  certain  measure  of  right :  he  taxed 
the  Duke  with  the  murder  of  Alidosi,  and  made  the  most  of  his 
past  animosity  to  the  Medici.  But  the  dying  Giuliano  rightly 
condemned  the  project  as  a  crime,  and  in  vain  begged  his 
brother  to  refrain.  Giuliano  died  before  the  conquest  of  Urbino 
was  carried  out,  but  he  must  have  known  his  brother  too  well  to 
hope  that  his  pleading  would  avail.  Leo  succeeded  in  taking 
his  duchy  from  Francesco  della  Rovere,  and  the  exploit  did  him 
no  credit.  In  the  enterprise  of  Maximilian  against  Milan, 
undertaken  in  the  same  year,  he  showed  still  further  his  skill  in 
"playing  marvellously  with  both  hands"  (Letter  to  Wolsey). 
He  sent  Cardinal  Dorizzi  as  a  mediator  between  Maximilian  and 
Francis,  giving  him  secret  instructions  to  act  in  the  interests  of 
France,  since  the  Austro-Spanish  House  was  more  dangerous  to 
Medici  prospects  than  the  French  King.  He  counted,  at  the 
same  time,  that  "  it  seemed  good  to  him  to  proceed  by  temporis- 
ing and  dissembling  like  the  rest". 

It  would  be  unprofitable  to  follow  too  closely  the  shifting 
grounds  of  Leo's  diplomacy.  In  the  great  game,  of  which 
Machiavelli  had  laid  down  the  rules,  he  played  an  inconspicu- 
ous and  inglorious  part.  In  response  to  the  alliance  between 
Francis  and  Charles,  he  intrigued  with  Maximilian  and  Henry 


308  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

of  England  for  the  defence  of  the  Church,  and  signed  the  peace 
of  Noyon.     The  instability  of  Maximilian — always  a  factor  to  be 
reckoned  with  by  his  friends  and  foes  alike — led  to  the. loss  of 
Urbino  after  eight  months'  warfare  in  1517.     Meanwhile,  pre- 
occupations of  a  more  engrossing  nature  held  Leo's  attention  in 
Rome.     The  historian  Michelet  describes  Leo  as  "unrieur,  un 
farceur,"  and  perhaps,  after  all,  the  comedy  element  pervaded 
his  reign  more  persistently  than  any  other.     It  is  impossible  to 
discover  how  far  Leo  was  serious  in  dealing  with  the  so-called 
"conspiracy"  of  the  Cardinals  in  1517.     The  situation  itself 
seems  to  have  been  half  a  farce  and  half  a  tragedy,  in  which 
the  actors  are  alternately  burlesque  and  sinister,  moving  us  to 
horror,  pity,  and  ridicule  as  the  grim  joke  unfolds.     The  growing 
influence   of  Giulio  de'   Medici,  the  failure  of  the  enterprise 
against  Urbino,  and  an  increasing  political  activity  at  the  papal 
court  had  made  Leo  unpopular  with  a  group  of  Cardinals,  of 
whom   old  Rafaello  Riario  was  the  leading  spirit.     A  private 
quarrel  between  Leo  and  the  boy-Cardinal  of  Siena,  in  which  the 
old  hostility  of  Florence  against  the  neighbour  city  is  traceable, 
led  to  some  rash  words.     An  absurd  plot  to  poison  the  Pope,  by 
means  of  bandages  to  be  applied  to  the  Pope's  sore  place  by  an 
assassin-doctor,  was  revealed,  and  the  Cardinals  Petrucci  and 
Sauli  were  imprisoned.     The  Pope  acted  up  to  the  crisis,  the 
gates  of  the  Vatican  were  barred,  and  a  Consistory  was  called  at 
which  two  other  Cardinals  who  were  said  to  be  implicated  were 
driven  by  terror  to  confession.     The  most  sensational  arrest  was 
that  of  Rafaello  Riario,  for  rumour  declared  that  Leo  was  at  last 
about  to  avenge  himself  on  the  nephew  of  Sixtus  IV.  for  the 
part  which  he  had  played  in  the  Pazzi  conspiracy.     But  Leo 
contented  himself  with  extorting  vast   sums   of  money  from 
Cardinals  Riario,  Soderini,  Sauli,  and  Hadrian  di  Costello.     The 
Medici   vengeance   was   reserved   for  young   Petrucci   and  his 
accomplices.     Alfonso  Petrucci  was  strangled  in  prison  because 
he  had  no  powerful  friends  to  intercede  for  him.     The  doctor 
and  the  secretary  who  had  engineered  the  plot  were  dragged 
through   the   streets   on   hurdles,    torn   with   hot  pincers,   and 
gibbeted  on  the  bridge  of  St.   Angelo.     Paris  de  Grassis,  the 
Master  of  the  Ceremonies,  who  understood  Leo  better  than  any- 
one, maintained  that  the  affair  had  not  really  perturbed  the 
Pope.     He  had  made  a  great  deal  of  money  out  of  it,  he  had 
struck  terror  into  the  College — a  peculiar  pleasure  for  an  easy- 
going man — and  he  had  paved  the  way  for  the  creation  of  thirty- 
one   new  Cardinals.      This   last    stroke  would   have  provoked 
criticism  if  anyone  had  dared  to  criticise  at  such  a  moment.     It 


JULIUS  II.  AND  LEO  X.  309 

beat  the  record  of  previous  creations,  it  gave  immense  power 
and  security  to  the  Medici  House,  and  it  brought  money  and  new 
services  to  Leo. 

This  new  instrument  of  power  helped  Leo's  family  projects. 
Reinforced  by  a  new  and  complacent  Curia,  he  sent  the  young 
ruler  of  Florence  to  France  to  obtain  a  royal  bride.  The  stu- 
pendous presents  which  Lorenzo  took  with  him  from  Leo  im- 
pressed even  the  magnificent  Francis,  and  the  marriage  treaty 
was  soon  arranged.  Poor  little  Madeleine  de  la  Tour  d'Auvergne 
— "  trop  plus  belle  pour  le  mari^  " — was  the  victim  chosen  to  be 
the  wife  of  the  diseased  and  dissolute  young  Medici.  The 
marriage  was  both  a  tragedy  and  a  failure.  Madeleine  died  in 
a  year,  after  giving  birth  to  the  little  "  Duchessina,"  who  was 
one  day  to  be  Queen  of  France.  Lorenzo  died  soon  after  her, 
and  with  him  Leo's  hopes  for  the  Medici.  Giuho  alone  remained, 
and  two  little  bastards  of  doubtful  parentage — Ippolito  and 
Alessandro.  The  ill-fated  little  Caterina  brought  "  all  the  catas- 
trophes of  Hellas  "  to  the  mind  of  Leo  when  she  came  into  his 
presence.  Henceforth  Leo  ceased  to  scheme  for  his  family,  and 
the  crafty  mind  of  Giulio  directed  his  policy.  The  Pope  turned 
to  his  hunting  and  his  buflfoonery  for  distraction,  and  for 
consolation  to  his  artists  and  men  of  letters. 

The  foreign  policy  in  these  last  days  of  Leo  was  more  tortuous 
than  ever.  On  the  death  of  Maximilian  in  1519,  Charles,  King  of 
Spain  and  ruler  of  the  Netherlands,  inherited  the  Empire.  For  two 
years  the  Medici  Pope  vacillated  between  Francis  and  Charles, 
and  finally  settled  into  an  alliance  with  Charles  in  1521.  Charles 
undertook  to  restore  Parma  and  Piacenza,  now  in  the  hands  of 
France,  and  Leo's  sole  desire  beyond  this  was  to  maintain  his 
hold  on  Urbino  and  Modena.  The  maintenance  of  the  States  of 
the  Church  had  supplanted  his  family  schemes,  and  beyond  this, 
to  his  credit  it  must  be  said,  he  was  anxious  to  free  Italy  from 
her  invaders  by  playing  off  France  against  the  Empire.  The 
fortunate  Pope  may  be  said  to  have  died  of  joy.  News  was 
brought  to  him  at  his  villa  of  the  complete  defeat  of  the  French, 
the  seizure  of  Milan  by  Charles's  general,  and  the  fulfilment  of 
the  undertaking  about  Parma  and  Piacenza.  Leo  had  been  out 
hunting,  and  the  excitement  of  the  news  following  on  the  day's 
labours  caused  a  bad  chill.  Incompetent  doctors  did  the  rest, 
and  in  a  week  Leo  died,  in  his  forty-sixth  year,  a  comparatively 
happy  man  in  spite  of  the  catastrophe  which  had  overtaken  the 
House  of  Lorenzo. 

On  the  whole  Leo  had  succeeded  in  "enjoying"  the  Papacy. 
He  had  surrounded  himself  with  the  poets  and  artists  whom  he 


310  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

delighted  to  honour;  he  had  lived  a  spacious  and  genial  life, 
giving  and  taking  all  that  good  fellowship  could  offer  and  more 
than  the  Papacy  could  afford.  He  had  the  faculty  of  ignoring 
the  things  which  should  have  disturbed  his  peace,  and  he  chose 
to  regard  the  warnings  which  reached  him  of  the  religious  un- 
rest in  Europe  as  a  little  disturbance  beyond  the  Alps  which 
would  subside  if  it  was  not  unduly  noticed.  It  is  significant  that 
Leo  disappointed  those  whom  he  might  have  satisfied.  He  was 
"a  prince,"  said  a  contemporary,  "who  greatly  deceived  the 
high  expectations  entertained  of  him  when  he  was  raised  to  the 
Papacy,  since  he  therein  displayed  more  cunning  and  less  good- 
ness than  the  world  had  imagined  of  him  ".  In  other  words, 
they  had  not  reckoned  on  his  family  ambition.  Goodness  in 
the  ordinary  sense  was  hardly  expected  of  a  Renaissance  Pope, 
and  the  description  does  not  imply  any  reflection  on  his  morals. 
All  the  charges  of  viciousness  brought  against  Leo  break  down 
upon  inquiry,  and  if  he  failed  to  condemn  these  things  in  his 
court,  it  cannot  be  said  that  his  personal  life  set  a  bad  example. 
Most  probably  he  looked  on  morals  with  the  same  indulgent 
cynicism  that  he  adopted  towards  life  in  general.  In  religion, 
too,  he  tolerated  any  degree  of  atheism  in  the  men  about  him, 
while  he  was  personally  punctilious  in  his  performance  of  his 
religious  duties,  and  his  love  of  beautiful  ceremonial  was  well 
known.  Leaders  of  Protestantism  have  labelled  Leo  the  "  Pagan 
Pope  "  and  the  "  Papal  Maecenas  ".  More  is  read  into  their  con- 
demnation than  the  facts  admit.  It  is  true  that  he  dined  with 
courtesans  and  consorted  with  atheists,  but  these  things  do  not 
necessarily  imply  anything  worse  than  excessive  tolerance.  And 
yet  the  verdict  against  Leo  is  a  just  one,  for  his  failure  to  con- 
demn was  treachery  to  the  great  principle  which  the  Papacy 
held  in  trust  for  the  world.  His  way  of  life,  although  it  was  not 
vicious,  was  often  unedifying,  and  his  standards,  if  they  were 
not  as  low  as  those  of  Alexander  VI.  or  as  perverted  as  those  of 
Julius  II.,  were  more  utterly  frivolous.  The  supreme  example 
of  a  great  dilettante,  he  could  rise  at  times  to  heights  of  genuine 
patriotism,  but  Italy,  in  common  with  other  noble  ideals, 
"divided  his  attention  with  manuscripts  and  sauces,  painters 
and  falcons"  (Macaulay). 


CHAPTER  XXVI 
THE  REFORMATION,  a.d.    1517-1650 

THE  soul  of  the  Papacy  woke  slowly  from  the  magic 
sleep  of  the  Renaissance  to  the  waking  reality  of  the 
Reformation.  The  reform  movement  never  seemed 
more  utterly  dead  than  in  the  year  1517,  which  brought  the 
Lateran  Council  of  Leo  to  its  inglorious  end.  And  yet,  in  the 
same  year  Luther  fixed  his  ninety-five  theses  against  indulgences 
to  the  door  of  the  Church  of  Wittenberg.  Leo  took  the  affair 
lightly,  and  in  spite  of  warnings  from  Maximilian  and  from 
others  who  saw  further  than  he,  persisted  in  looking  on  it  as  a 
"monk's  quarrel".  Even  when  he  felt  obliged  to  summon 
Luther  to  Rome  on  a  charge  of  heresy,  he  was  not  seriously 
troubled.  He  sent  Cardinal  Cajetan  to  extort  Luther's  sub- 
mission without  in  the  least  appreciating  the  issues — or  the  man. 
Cajetan  was  a  good  theologian,  but  he  approached  the  situation 
from  the  ^vrong  point  of  view.  He  came  in  the  might  of  the 
Catholic  faith  to  crush  an  heretical  monk,  and  when  Luther 
asked  for  discussion,  his  Italian  mind  accused  him  of  wanting  a 
tournament.  The  situation  was  significant,  and  so  were  the 
steps  which  led  Luther  into  open  revolt  against  the  Papacy. 
Luther's  career  belongs  to  the  history  of  Protestantism,  but  the 
principles  bound  up  with  it  and  the  forces  which  it  set  in  motion 
produced  the  greatest  crisis  which  ever  faced  the  Papacy. 

Since  the  time  of  Marsiglio  of  Padua  political  theory  had 
not  played  a  practical  part  in  the  making  of  papal  history.  In 
the  fourteenth  century,  Louis  of  Bavaria  happened  to  find  in 
Marsiglio  the  philosophy  which  he  wanted  to  give  a  creed  to  his 
party.  In  Luther  the  same  views,  differently  stated,  happened 
to  be  allied  to  unusual  qualities  of  character  in  the  career  of  a 
political  reformer.  Between  Marsiglio  and  Luther  lay  the 
conciliar  movement,  which  had  failed  because  it  had  identified 
itself  with  a  political  system  which  was  not  strong  enough  to 
assert  itself  against  the  restored  Papacy,  on  the  one  hand,  and 
the  growing  monarchies  on  the  other.  The  federal  idea,  to  which 
the  Councils  anchored  themselves,  had  no  chance  against  the 

3U 


312  A  SHOET  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

personal  monarchies  of  the  fifteenth  century.  The  power  of 
Martin  V.  had  overruled  the  decree  Frequens,  and  his  successors 
had  held  their  own  against  the  conciliar  menace  from  various 
motives  and  in  diflFerent  ways.  Even  Eugenius  IV.  had  managed 
to  defeat  the  Council  of  Basle,  by  the  spurious  prestige  which  he 
acquired  by  the  so-called  union  of  East  and  West.  But  the 
spirit  which  made  the  Councils  dangerous  had  never  died.  It 
was  carried  across  the  Alps  to  sterner  climates,  where  it  gained 
a  wider  freedom.  Signs  of  its  life  appear  in  the  fear  which 
haunted  Alexander  VI.,  in  the  courage  of  Erasmus  and  Reuchlin, 
and  in  the  simple  fervour  which  inspired  the  German  renaiss- 
ance. 

In  a  sense,  Luther  owed  little  to  the  Councils.  He  was  first 
and  last  an  individualist,  having  little  in  common  with  the 
federal  democracy  which  was  the  conciliar  ideal.  His  associa- 
tion with  the  territorial  party,  as  against  the  peasants,  on  the 
one  hand,  and  the  Emperor  on  the  other,  was  the  result  of 
political  necessity  combined  with  his  inherent  respect  for  law 
and  order.  Circumstances  drove  him  into  politics,  and  at  the 
Diet  of  Worms,  in  1521,  the  individual  drama  becomes  merged 
in  the  European  crisis.  Luther,  the  excommunicated  monk, 
passionately  sincere,  heart-broken,  and  still  Catholic  in  spirit,  is 
confronted  with  the  young  Emperor  Charles,  anxious  to  stand 
well  with  the  Pope,  but  equally  anxious  to  safeguard  his  own 
honour.  Behind  Luther  stands  the  party  which  has  adopted 
him,  headed  by  Hutten  and  Sickingen,  ready  to  go  to  all  lengths 
of  rebellion,  and  to  drive  their  leader  to  the  logical  conclusion  of 
his  temerity.  The  moderate  party,  which  centred  round  the 
neutrality  of  the  Elector  Frederick,  plays  the  part  which 
moderation  is  apt  to  play  in  the  heat  of  conflict.  The  Edict  of 
Worms  confirmed  the  Bull  of  Excommunication,  and  Leo,  on  his 
death-bed,  was  not  seriously  disturbed  by  the  state  of  things 
which  he  left  in  Germany. 

The  successor  of  Leo  was  a  Professor  of  Louvain  who  had 
been  the  tutor  of  Charles  in  his  Netherland  days.  Adrian  VI. 
was  a  complete  contrast  to  his  predecessor,  and  much  might 
have  been  hoped  from  his  election  if  he  could  have  been  given 
a  free  hand.  But  from  the  time  of  his  arrival  in  Rome  in  1522 
until  his  death  in  the  following  year,  disillusion  and  unpopularity 
followed  everything  which  he  did.  He  was  an  ardent  reformer 
of  the  conservative  and  academic  type,  but  the  practical 
opposition  which  he  met  with  was  too  much  for  him,  and  his 
schemes  melted  away  in  the  fervid  atmosphere  of  M^dicean 
intrigue  which  stifled  him  in  Rom^. 


THE  KEFOEMATION  313 

The  attitude  of  the  papal  legate  at  the  Diet  of  Niirnberg  was 
typical  of  Adrian's  ideas.  Luther  had  reappeared,  after  a  short 
retirement,  and  was  preaching  at  Wittenberg  in  defiance  of  the 
Bull  and  the  Edict.  Adrian  demanded  that  the  Diet  should 
enforce  the  Edict.  The  legate  spoke  in  a  conciliatory  manner  of 
the  services  which  Luther  had  rendered  in  pointing  out  the  need 
for  reform.  Luther,  he  said,  was  right  in  condemning  the 
corruption  of  the  Church,  but  wrong  in  his  theology :  therefore 
Luther  must  be  put  down  before  the  reforms  could  be  set  in 
motion.  The  refusal  of  the  Diet  to  carry  out  the  Edict  of  Worms 
proves  the  strength  of  the  hold  which  Luther's  views  had  gained 
in  the  last  few  months.  Adrian  could  not  take  any  further 
steps  because  Charles  was  too  strong  to  oppose,  and  Charles  had 
demanded  the  non-interference  of  the  Pope  in  German  afi'airs  as 
the  price  of  his  support.  The  fall  of  Rhodes,  which  the  Turks 
had  captured,  gave  Adrian  special  need  of  Charles's  help. 
Troubles  with  Francis,  who  was  threatening  the  conquest  of 
Milan,  were  a  further  cause  for  anxiety.  Adrian's  last  failure 
was  the  sacrifice  of  his  neutrality  in  the  great  Hapsburg-Valois 
duel  which  was  looming  over  Europe.  His  alliance  with  Charles 
and  Henry  VIII.  was  the  final  proof  that  politics  had  over- 
whelmed his  religious  aspirations. 

Adrian's  death  was  tragic  in  its  loneliness.  He  had  not  made 
a  single  friend  in  Rome.  The  Cardinals  of  the  Medicean  court 
despised  his  unworldliness  and  took  advantage  of  it.  The  old 
Flemish  woman  and  the  two  Spanish  pages  who  formed  his 
household  were  a  cause  of  ridicule.  He  was  a  foreigner  and  an 
outsider,  and  he  does  not  seem  to  have  tried  to  be  otherwise. 
Life  as  he  found  it  in  Rome  must  have  been  uncongenial  in  the 
extreme  to  his  simple  and  severe  nature.  But  there  is  greater 
pathos  in  the  ruin  of  his  aspirations.  No  Pope  held  loftier 
ideals  than  Adrian  VI.,  but  none  probably  achieved  less.  The 
fault  was  partly  in  his  own  will,  which  was  firm  to  a  point,  and 
apt  to  give  way  at  the  wrong  moment;  but  the  chief  cause  of 
his  failure  was  the  unequal  strife  between  the  forces  of  religion 
and  politics  which  rocked  the  Papacy  in  the  early  days  of  the 
Reformation. 

The  return  of  the  Medicean  Papacy  in  the  election  of  Clement 
VIL  (Giulio  de'  Medici)  delighted  the  Romans,  who  welcomed 
the  prospect  of  "  a  flourishing  court  and  a  brave  pontificate  ". 
There  was  little  doubt  which  of  the  two  forces  would  dominate 
the  new  reign  ;  the  only  question  which  remained  doubtful  was 
as  to  which  side  Clement  would  take  in  the  Hapsburg-Valois 
struggle.     The  situation  depended  a  good  deal  on  the  see-saw  of 


314  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OP  THE  PAPACY 

influences  exerted  over  him  by  Giberti  and  Schomberg,  the  am- 
bassadors of  the  rival  courts.  He  found  the  Papacy  allied  with 
Charles,  and  at  first  it  was  convenient  to  let  this  alliance  hold. 
Cardinal  Campeggio  attended  the  Diet  of  Nui'nberg  in'  1524,  and 
gained,  with  the  support  of  Charles  and  his  brother,  Ferdinand,  a 
promise  that  the  Edict  against  Luther  should  be  enforced  "  as 
well  as  they  were  able,  and  as  far  as  possible  ".  This  rather  un- 
satisfactory undertaking  was  the  utmost  that  Campeggio  could  ob- 
tain :  it  was  clear  that  the  struggle  was  no  longer  against  Luther 
but  against  Lutheranism,  which  was  not  to  be  trifled  with.  The 
proposal  of  the  General  Council  to  be  held  in  Germany,  and 
to  be  preceded  by  a  preliminary  Diet  at  Speyer,  was  a  cause 
of  acute  anxiety  to  Clement.  The  character  of  Giulio  de' 
Medici,  the  bar  sinister  which  branded  his  name,  the  relation- 
ship which  he  all  but  acknowledged  to  the  boy,  Alessandro, 
titular  Duke  of  Florence,  and  the  well-known  indiscretions  of 
his  youth,  were  each  a  suflQcient  reason  for  his  reluctance  to  face 
the  moral  inquisition  of  a  Council.  But  there  seemed  to  be  no 
way  out,  short  of  immense  loss  of  allegiance  in  Germany.  The 
reforms  brought  forward  by  Campeggio,  in  the  hope  of  holding 
the  moderate  party,  were  insufficient  and  merely  irritating. 
They  aimed  at  the  suppression  of  heresy  rather  than  the  con- 
cession of  papal  prerogatives  and  the  enforcement  of  higher 
moral  standards.  The  boycotting  of  the  University  of  Witten- 
berg was  a  tactless  blow  at  the  territorial  dignity  of  the  Elector. 
But  Campeggio's  reforms,  inadequate  as  they  were,  mark  the 
beginning  of  the  conservative  reformation,  in  which  lay  the  best 
hope  of  the  Catholic  Church. 

The  alliance  with  Charles  had  served  its  purpose,  and  Clem- 
ent's mind  turned  back  to  the  Medicean  schemes  of  neutrality 
favourable  to  the  interests  of  Florence.  He  began  to  detach 
himself  from  Charles,  entered  into  secret  understandings  with 
Francis,  and  allowed  the  Medici  captain,  John  of  the  Black 
Bands,  to  take  a  French  command.  But  the  battle  of  Pavia,  in 
1525,  brought  the  unexpected  defeat  and  capture  of  Francis, 
and  the  downfall  of  Clement's  hopes.  Charles  never  trusted 
Clement  again,  but  he  came  to  an  understanding  with  him,  and 
contemptuously  acceded  to  the  Pope's  "bargaining  for  small 
gains".  At  this  moment  Clement  might  have  put  himself 
at  the  head  of  an  Italian  league,  and  reclaimed  Italy  from 
the  ravages  of  the  rival  powers.  But  he  had  no  desire  to  be  a 
national  Pope.  Schomberg  pointed  out  to  him  that  Florence  had 
more  to  fear  from  the  Italian  States  than  from  external  power, 
^nd  the  reflection  took  root  in  his  mind.      In  January,  1526, 


THE  REFOKMATION  815 

he  gave  his  support  to  the  Treaty  of  Madrid,  which  gave  Francis 
his  freedom,  on  the  understanding  that  the  French  King  would 
not  keep  faith  with  Charles.  Four  months  later  the  League  of 
Cognac  was  made  between  Clement,  Francis,  Venice,  and  Milan 
for  the  defence  of  Italy  against  the  Emperor.  The  Imperial 
Minister,  Moncada,  did  his  best  to  break  up  the  League,  but  the 
Pope  stood  unwontedly  firm,  and  Charles  prepared  his  armies. 

From  the  beginning  the  League  of  Cognac  was  unfortunate, 
and  the  course  of  events  showed  it  to  be  clumsily  put  together 
and  badly  engineered.  Its  general,  the  Duke  of  Urbino,  was 
hostile  to  the  Pope.  France  and  England  soon  made  it  clear 
that  they  meant  to  be  sleeping  partners.  Cardinal  Colonna, 
whose  influence  had  secured  Clement's  election,  was  a  strong 
Imperialist,  and,  therefore,  a  declared  antagonist.  Clement 
heard  with  terror  of  his  growing  friendship  with  Moncada,  the 
Imperial  Minister,  and  the  news  of  the  strong  Neapolitan- 
Colonna  force  which  was  being  raised  led  to  a  momentary 
truce.  The  news  of  the  battle  of  Mohacs,  which  overthrew  the 
kingdom  of  Hungary,  and  brought  the  Turks  to  the  Danube, 
startled  Clement  into  a  display  of  public  spirit,  and  led  him  to 
open  negotiations  for  the  reunion  of  Christendom.  Moncada's 
raid  on  Rome  with  the  Colonna  forces  interrupted  all  larger  en- 
deavours, and  opened  the  eyes  of  the  Pope  to  the  unpopularity 
of  his  civic  rule.  For  the  Romans  failed  to  rise  in  his  defence, 
and  left  him  to  "  settle  his  own  quarrel ".  His  first  idea  was 
to  receive  the  rebels,  like  Boniface  VIII.,  in  full  pontificals,  but  a 
misgiving,  perhaps,  as  to  his  fitness  for  the  part  led  to  his  flight 
at  the  last  moment  to  St.  Angelo.  The  Spanish  soldiers  who 
were  with  the  Colonnesi  plundered  the  Vatican  '•  like  Turks 
despoiling  the  churches  of  Hungary,"  and  brought  Clement  to 
terms  with  Moncada.  He  agreed  to  forgive  Cardinal  Colonna 
and  his  family,  and  for  a  month  he  kept  his  word.  But  as  soon 
as  he  had  had  time  to  collect  a  suflicient  force  to  retaliate,  a 
barbarous  vendetta  expedition  destroyed  the  Colonna  castles  and 
the  villages  which  they  sheltered. 

After  this  prelude,  events  moved  quickly.  Screened  by 
diplomatic  negotiations,  Charles  poured  his  armies  into  Italy. 
The  Spaniards,  under  Bourbon,  had  already  garrisoned  Milan  : 
another  force  of  10,000  landed  at  Gaeta  under  Lannoy,  Frunds- 
berg  was  crossing  the  Alps  with  12,000  Lanzknechts,  on  fire  with 
Lutheran  fanaticism.  The  Duke  of  Urbino  tried  to  attack  Bour- 
bon and  Frundsberg  at  once,  and  failed  in  both  directions.  John 
of  the  Black  Bands  was  killed  in  a  skirmish,  thus  depriving  the 
League  of  its  most  brilliant  leader.     Alfonso  of  Ferrara  broke 


316  A  SHOKT  HISTOKY  OP  THE  PAPACY 

with  Clement  owing  to  his  fatal  habit  of  bargaining  at  a  crisis, 
and  led  out  his  forces  in  the  name  of  Charles.  In  his  panic 
Clement  showed  himself  at  his  worst.  The  Imperial  deluge 
swept  from  the  north  towards  Florence.  All  the  Medici  in 
Clement  prompted  him  to  save  the  city  of  his  House  at  all  costs 
— even  at  the  expense  of  Rome.  The  truce  which  he  patched 
up  with  Lannoy  was  madness,  for  it  merely  revealed  his  weak- 
ness when  it  was  too  late  to  stem  the  tide.  But  the  concentra- 
tion of  Urbino's  army  before  Florence  saved  the  city.  The 
news  of  the  Pope's  truce  fired  a  trail  in  the  Imperial  army. 
Starving  and  ill-paid,  it  was  already  on  the  brink  of  mutiny ; 
and,  powerless  to  hold  it,  Bourbon  decided  to  give  it  rein, 
Clement  watched  the  crisis  approach  with  characteristic  help- 
lessness. The  French  General,  Renzo  da  Ceri,  tried  to  organise 
the  army  of  resistance,  and  did  so  to  some  effect.  He  counted 
on  the  demoralisation  of  the  invading  force  and  the  strength  of 
his  artillery.  The  storm  broke  against  the  walls  of  Rome,  was 
beaten  back,  approached  again,  and  gained  a  hold.  A  fog  helped 
the  attack,  and  foiled  the  Roman  artillery.  Bourbon's  death 
inspired  a  supreme  effort,  and  the  city  was  gained. 

Meanwhile,  Clement  on  his  knees  in  his  chapel  was  doing 
the  right  thing  at  the  wrong  time  as  usual.  He  had  thought  of 
going  out  to  rally  his  soldiers,  of  cheering  the  civilians ;  before 
that  he  had  thought  of  bribing  the  invaders  ;  when  the  time  for 
this  had  passed  by,  he  did  violence  to  his  conscience  by  selling 
five  cardinalates  for  a  perfectly  useless  sum  of  money.  At  last 
he  made  for  St.  Angelo,  too  late  for  safety  or  for  dignity,  sheltered 
under  the  violet  cloak  of  an  episcopal  friend.  The  surrender  of 
the  city  on  the  next  day  was  only  the  beginning  of  the  calamity 
which  was  still  to  come.  The  sack  of  Rome,  which  followed 
during  three  days,  is  one  of  the  nightmares  of  history.  Of  the 
three  armies  which  took  part  in  it,  "  each  nationality  among  the 
soldiers  contributed  its  worst  qualities  to  the  utter  depravation 
of  the  rest ".  German  profanity,  Spanish  cruelty,  and  Italian 
guile  combined  in  villainy  which  has  never  been  exceeded. 
After  three  days  they  grew  tired  of  violating  women  and  muti- 
lating priests,  and  drunken  brawls  and  riots  drowned  the  cries 
of  tortured  treasure-storers. 

For  a  month  Clement  held  out  in  St.  Angelo,  hoping  every 
day  to  be  relieved  by  the  Duke  of  Urbino.  When  at  last  sup- 
plies began  to  give  out,  he  signed  the  capitulation.  He  remained 
in  the  castle,  virtually  the  Emperor's  prisoner,  until  December, 
when  he  contrived  to  escape  to  Orvieto.  The  situation  had  not 
been  without  its  difficulties  for  Charles.     There  was  the  question 


THE  REFORMATION  317 

of  how  he  was  to  deal  with  his  great  prize,  and  plenty  of  advice 
was  offered  on  all  sides.  Some  suggested  the  reduction  of  the 
Papacy  to  a  pui-ely  spiritual  office,  others  its  removal  from 
Rome.  Gattinara's  counsel  opposed  these  suggestions,  fearing 
the  designs  of  France  and  England.  "  It  would  be  best,"  in  his 
opinion,  "  to  keep  the  Apostolic  Seat  so  low  that  your  Majesty 
can  always  dispose  of  it  and  command  it.  .  .  .  The  Pope  and 
Cardinals  have  asked  me  to  inform  your  Majesty  on  this  point, 
as  they  think  your  Majesty  does  not  want  the  Apostolic  Seat  to 
be  enthely  ruined,"  Charles's  comment  on  the  news  of  the 
surrender  of  Rome  is  more  cautious  and  characteristic  of  him. 
"  I  do  not  know  what  you  may  have  done  with  the  Pope,"  he 
writes  to  Bourbon,  not  knowing  of  his  death,  "  but  what  I  desire 
is  a  good  peace." 

At  Orvieto,  Clement  was  more  uncomfortable,  if  anything, 
than  in  the  castle  of  St.  Angelo.  Two  English  bishops,  Gardiner 
and  Foxe,  visited  him  there  to  demand  the  dissolution  of 
Henry's  marriage  from  Catherine  of  Aragon.  They  describe  the 
cheerless  poverty  and  cold  of  Clement's  apartments,  and  the 
wretchedness  of  his  suite,  adding  that  "  it  were  better  to  be  in 
captivity  in  Rome  than  here  at  liberty  ".  In  the  circumstances 
it  was  impossible  for  Clement  to  do  what  Henry  wanted. 
Catherine  was  the  aunt  of  his  vanquisher,  with  whom  he  had 
yet  to  make  terms.  But  he  contrived  to  satisfy  the  English 
King  with  a  vague  promise  of  future  concession. 

Meanwhile,  the  attempts  of  Francis  on  Lombardy  brought 
Charles,  in  1529,  to  the  treaty  of  Barcelona,  and  an  alliance,  at 
the  expense  of  Florence,  was  made  between  the  Emperor  and 
the  Pope.  Charles  had  decided  that  the  Pope  could  be  more 
useful  to  him  if  he  were  not  too  deeply  humiliated  in  the  eyes 
of  Europe.  Florence  had  revolted  against  the  Medici,  and  her 
liberties  were  to  be  overthrown  in  order  that  Clement  should 
aggrandise  his  worthless  son.  The  siege  and  smrrender  of  Flor- 
ence in  1530,  hastened  by  the  treachery  of  her  general,  was  an 
act  of  reparation  on  the  part  of  Charles,  whose  attitude  to  the 
Pope  had  changed  since  1527.  This  change  was  the  result  of 
the  interplay  of  German  and  Italian  affairs. 

In  Germany,  the  Peasants'  Revolt  in  1525  had  changed  the 
position  of  Luther,  and  made  him  more  dangerous  than  ever. 
For  it  had  driven  him  definitely  on  to  the  side  of  law  and  order, 
and  identified  his  party  with  the  territorial  princes  and  lesser 
nobles,  who  were  infinitely  more  dangerous  to  the  Imperium 
than  the  helpless  rabble  of  Mlinzer's  following.  To  this  period 
belongs  the  growth  of  Lutheran  liberties,  expressed  in  the  Recess 


318  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

of  Speyer,  which  was  the  result  of  the  influence  of  the  Lutheran 
princes  and  the  weakness  of  the  Catholic  party.  To  it  also 
belongs  "  Ein  feste  Burg  ist  enser  Gott,"  the  Marseillaise  of  the 
Reformation,  as  Heine  calls  it.  All  the  splendour  of  spiritual 
revolt  found  expression  in  Luther's  hymns.  Protestant  exalta- 
tion had  become  articulate ;  its  appeal  to  the  imagination 
could  be  set  against  the  poetry  of  Catholicism.  In  the  events 
which  led  up  to  the  Diet  of  Augsburg  in  1530,  Luther's  philo- 
sophical position  became  clear.  Dissociated  from  the  "robbing, 
murdering  peasants  "  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  Empire  and 
Papacy  on  the  other,  Luther  is  the  founder  of  a  new  spiritual 
kingdom.  We  have  already  noticed  the  essential  one-ness  of 
the  mediaeval  theory  of  the  world.  The  Pope  and  the  Emperor 
are  two  lights  in  the  one  firmament,  two  officials  of  the  one 
Civitas  Dei.  They  strive  together,  not  as  rival  systems,  but  as 
rival  exponents  of  one  system.  The  reason  why  Luther  is  not 
the  successor  of  the  mediaeval  opponents  of  the  Papacy  is  that 
his  attacks  are  directed  against  the  system  itself.  He  pulls 
down  the  firmament,  with  the  two  lights  and  all  the  stars,  and 
sets  another  in  its  place.  The  new  "  Civitas  Dei "  is  not  like  the 
old,  ecclesiastical  and  traditional ;  it  is  essentially  secular,  and 
yet  equally  essentially  religious.  "  The  sanctity  of  lay  power 
is  Luther's  innovation  "  (Figgis),  and  his  insistence  on  this 
principle  is  the  cause  of  his  aloofness  from  the  peasants.  The 
result  of  Luther's  political  creed  travelled  far  in  the  region  of 
political  theory.  We  find  it  in  Hooker  and  the  theory  of  Divine 
Right,  in  the  State  religion  of  Louis  XIV.,  and  in  the  national 
Churches  of  modern  States.  Luther's  insistence  on  the  rights 
of  the  territorial  prince,  which  found  its  political  expression 
at  last  in  the  principle  of  "  Cujus  regio  ejus  religio,"  was  the 
death-blow  of  the  federal  system  which  the  Councils  had  adopted  ; 
it  left  no  room  for  extra-territorial  rights,  and  the  results  are 
seen  at  the  Council  of  Trent  in  the  repudiation  by  the  Pope 
himself  of  the  idea  of  voting  by  nations. 

We  have  left  on  one  side  the  doctrinal  revolution  which  was 
the  soul  of  the  Protestant  movement,  because  the  political 
aspect  of  the  Reformation  alone  concerns  a  short  history  of  the 
Papacy.  But  it  must  be  remembered  that  the  opposing  theories 
of  justification  and  the  rival  streams  that  flowed  from  them  have 
a  deeper  influence  than  the  political  forces  to  which  they  were 
allied.  One  of  the  efl'ects  of  the  Reformation  is  the  separation 
of  the  spheres  of  history  and  religion. 

In  1530,  Charles  was  crowned  at  Bologna  by  the  Pope,  who 
was  still  to  all  intents  and  purposes  his  captive  of  war.     In 


THE  REFORMATION  319 

return  for  the  discomforts  of  his  position,  Clement  regained 
Florence  for  his  family,  and  soothed  his  pride  by  the  marriage 
of  the  unlovable  Alessandro  with  Margaret,  the  Emperor's 
illegitimate  daughter.  Two  years  later,  a  second  meeting  of 
Charles  and  Clement  at  Bologna  saw  a  modification  of  the 
situation.  Charles  was  anxious  to  hurry  on  the  proposed 
Council  in  Germany,  which  Clement  was  equally  anxious  to 
delay.  Clement  meanwhile  had  made  overtures  to  France,  and 
a  marriage  was  proposed  between  the  little  "  Duchessina  "  and 
the  second  son  of  Francis.  Charles  did  not  believe  in  the 
likelihood  of  this  marriage  or  he  would  have  taken  definite 
steps  to  prevent  it,  for  Francis  was  on  good  terms  with  the 
Protestants,  and  the  co-operation  of  the  Pope  in  Germany  was 
essential  to  the  suppression  of  the  Lutheran  princes.  But  in 
spite  of  the  Valois  pride  on  which  Charles  had  counted,  Caterina 
de'  Medici  made  the  first  real  royal  marriage  of  her  house. 
There  was  great  rejoicing  at  the  magnificent  wedding  solemnised 
by  the  Pope  at  Marseilles,  and  the  sumptuous  presents  of  the 
Medici  once  more  astonished  the  court  of  France.  Only  the 
unhappy  Caterina  remained  a  pathetic  little  figure,  and  looked 
out  on  the  splendid  scene  with  dark  eyes  of  tragedy.  It  was 
said  that  she  left  her  heart  in  Italy  with  the  "  comely  and 
courteous"  Ippolito,  her  cousin,  whose  popularity  in  Florence 
had  stood  in  the  light  of  Alessandro,  and  who  was  driven  in 
spite  of  tears  and  prayers  to  adopt  a  clerical  profession  for 
which  he  was  entirely  unsuited. 

The  familiar  quarrel  with  Henry  of  England  was  the  final 
disaster  of  Clement's  reign.  Since  the  time  when  Henry's 
ministers  came  as  suppliants  to  Orvieto,  the  attitude  of  the 
King  had  changed.  It  became  clear  that  Charles  was  master  of 
the  situation,  and  that  he  would  not  tolerate  the  divorce.  In 
summoning  the  case  to  Rome,  Clement  was  merely  declaring 
his  real  intention  not  to  give  his  consent.  The  series  of  strata- 
gems by  which  Henry  tried  to  circumvent  the  Pope's  opposition 
are  well  known.  The  inaction  of  Clement,  his  refusal  to  give 
way  or  to  strike  effectively  for  Catharine,  irritated  Henry,  and, 
at  the  same  time,  made  it  possible  for  him  to  defy  the  Pope  in 
practice  without  committing  himself  to  rebellious  language. 
Perpetual  remonstrances  arrived  in  England,  urging  Henry  to 
give  up  living  with  Anne  Boleyn  and  to  take  back  Catharine. 
Francis  supported  Henry  in  refusing  to  go  to  Rome.  Temporising 
on  both  sides  enabled  Henry  to  undermine  the  papal  authority 
in  England  before  the  arrival  of  the  Bull  of  Excommunication. 
The  fall  of  Wolsey  and  the  rise  of  Thomas  Cromwell  had  marked 


320  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

a  change  in  Henry's  policy  which  led  step  by  step  to  the 
alienation  of  English  obedience.  It  was  a  personal  quarrel 
between  two  politicians :  no  doctrinal  questions  were  involved, 
and  Henry  was  as  Catholic  in  mind  after  the  breach  as  before 
it  It  was  true  that  he  borrowed  the  courage  to  defy  prejudice 
and  tradition  from  the  Protestants,  and  occasionally  it  became 
necessary,  as  at  the  time  of  the  passing  of  the  Ten  Articles,  to 
make  common  cause  with  his  fellow-rebels  in  Germany.  But 
he  did  so  reluctantly,  and  soon  retracted  whatever  doctrinal 
concessions  he  had  been  persuaded  to  make.  In  the  autumn  of 
1534,  Clement  VII.  closed  his  inglorious  career.  "The  very 
sport  of  misfortune,"  it  is  almost  impossible  to  pity  him,  for  he 
brought  his  troubles  on  himself  by  his  particularly  unattractive 
faults.  Even  his  family  had  disappointed  him.  The  quarrels 
of  Alessandro  and  Ippolito,  who  had  been  rivals  from  their 
birth,  had  caused  him  great  annoyance,  and  if  Alessandro  was 
indeed  his  son,  as  is  supposed,  he  cannot  have  been  proud  of 
him.  Stories  of  his  brutality  and  unpopularity  saddened  the 
last  year  of  Clement's  life,  and  must  have  made  him  feel  that 
he  had  lived  in  vain. 

The  election  of  Alessandro  Farnese  (1534)  seemed  to  recall 
for  the  Cardinals  the  good  days  of  the  Renaissance,  and  they 
welcomed  him  as  a  man  of  genial  culture,  who  bore  about  him 
signs  of  his  education  at  Lorenzo's  court,  and  promised  to  restore 
the  classical  tradition  of  Rome.  His  first  act  as  Paul  III. 
indicated  higher  aspirations.  He  appointed  six  Cardinals,  some 
of  whom  were  entirely  unknown  to  him,  for  their  virtue  and 
distinction  alone.  All  these  six  men  belonged  to  a  party  which 
had  grown  up  in  Italy  and  from  which  the  Papacy  had  much  to 
hope.  The  Reformation,  in  its  wider  aspect,  was  not  a  purely 
German  movement.  In  Italy  there  were  many  who  sympathised 
with  the  doctrines  of  Luther,  and  who  longed  for  the  purification 
of  religion.  The  "  Oratory  of  Divine  Love,"  founded  in  Rome  in 
the  days  of  Leo  X.,  became  a  nucleus  of  renewed  spiritual  life. 
Men  of  difi'erent  temperament  and  divergent  aspiration  met 
together  to  discuss  the  purification  of  the  Church.  The  gentle 
Gsetano  da  Thiene,  and  Carafi'a,  the  fervent  zealot,  who  together 
founded  the  priests'  order  of  the  Theatines,  were  among  the 
leaders  of  the  Oratorian  party.  Its  influence  spread  to 
Venice  and  attracted  Contarini  and  Cortese.  Other  prominent 
thinkers  of  the  Oratory  were  Reginald  Pole,  Giberti,  Morone  and 
Sadoleto — all  men  of  mental  distinction  and  all  devoted  to  the 
principles  of  reform.  The  reform  movement  in  Italy  had  a 
character  distinct  from  Protestantism,  although  the  doctrines 


THE  KEFORMATION  321 

which  it  made  its  own  had  ninch  in  common  with  Proteptant 
teaching.     But  the  Itahan  reformers  were  fundamentally  loyal 
to  the  Papacy.     They  held  that  "no  corruption  can  be  so  great 
as  to  justify  a  defection  from  the  sacred  union"      So  far  Ihey 
were  all  agreed,  and  the  report  of  the  commission  of  1537  for 
which  they  were  responsible,  unler  the  auspices  of  Paul  III 
was    ridiculed  by  the  Protestants  as  a  half-measure.      As  the 
Catholic  reform  movement  advanced,  it  showed  a  tendency  to 
split  in  two;  there  was  the  extreme  Catholic  and  conservative 
party,  of  which  Caraffa  was  the  typical  representative,  and  there 
was  the  compromise  party,  eager  for  reunion  with  the  Protestants 
and  willing  to  give  gi'ound  in  certain  directions  if  it  could  be 
met  in  the  same  spirit  by  the  opponents.      The  hope  of  the 
''liberal"  Catholic   reformers   is   revealed   at   the   Congress  of 
Ratisbon— of  the  "conservative"  wing  at  the  Council  of  Trent 
The  election  of  Paul  III.  seemed  to  bring  the  Catholic  reform 
party  into  its  own,  but,  in  fact,  his  pontificate  was  a  disappoint- 
ment.    His  character  was  a  subtle  blend  of  good  and  evil,  and 
his  motives  were  seldom  pure.     A  genuine  interest  in  reform 
and  a  private  life  which  badly  needed  it  had  somehow  to  be 
brought  into  harmony.     Gradually  his  weaknesses  choked  his 
good  intentions,  and  in  the  end  he  became  a  sower  of  tares 
His  politics  were  dictated  by  Borgian  principles.     He  strug-led 
to  keep  the  peace  between  Charles  and  Francis  in  order  to''  in- 
crease the  power  of  his  sons  and  his  grandchildi-en.     He  married 
his  grandson  Ottavio  to  the  Emperor's  daughter,  the  widow  of 
Alessandro  de'  Medici.    He  seized  Camerino  to  give  him  a  duchy 
and  plotted  a  larger  enterprise  against  Milan.     Another  grand- 
child was  married  to  the  Valois  Duke  of  Vendome,  to  keep  the 
balance  of  his  friendship  true  to  its  impartial  ideal.     Paul  III 
found  himself  in  the  gratifying  position  of  peacemaker  between 
the  Valois  and  Hapsburg  rivals.    The  meeting  between  Charles  and 
Francis,  which  he  had  arranged  in  1538,  was  so  successful  that 
1  aul  became  jealous  of  the  friendship  which  he  had  made.     The 
truce  which  had  been  arranged  for  ten  years  endured  for  three 
and  Charles  had  plenty  to  do  in  the  short  respite.     Dangers  be- 
set him  in  Germany  from  Catholic  princes  as  well  as  from  Pro- 
testants.    The  Protestant  League  of  Schmalkald  had  asserted 
Its  power  against  the  Imperial  Council.    The  ecclesiastical  princes 
of  the  Catholic  party  were  on  the  verge  of  joining  the  Lutheran 
confederacy  for  the  purpose  of  opposing  the  authority  of  Charles 
The  Emperor's  hands  had  been  so  full  with  his  French  and 
Turkish  campaigns  that  he  had  let  Germany  slide,  and  great 
care  was  needed  in  getting  back  his  hold.     The  confusion  of 


322  A  SHOET  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

parties — the  divisiong  among  the  Catholics  and  the  temporary 
union  of  the  Protestants — resulted  in  the  first  real  approach  to 
union  at  the  Congress  of  Ratisbon  in  1541. 

The  persuasive  gentleness  of  Contarini  at  Ratisbon  was  the 
outcome  of  the  "  liberal "  reform  movement.  He  and  his  op- 
ponent, Melancthon,  found  themselves  in  complete  sympathy  on 
the  four  leading  points  of  dogma  which  were  under  discussion. 
Never  was  there  a  controversy  carried  on  with  such  genuine  de- 
sire of  the  combatants  to  meet  each  other  half-way,  and  yet  for 
this  very  reason  the  Congress  of  Ratisbon  failed.  Perhaps  there 
was  too  much  readiness  to  give  way  on  Contarini's  part ;  perhaps 
the  sterner  spirits  among  the  Protestants  detected  the  dilettante 
element  which  prevented  the  liberal  Catholics  from  taking  any 
great  part  in  the  remaking  of  Christendom.  Two  things  are 
certain,  that  the  Pope  was  not  enthusiastic  at  the  harmonious 
results  of  the  Congress,  and  that  the  "  conservative  "  Catholic 
reformers  were  definitely  displeased.  Pole's  letter  to  Contarini, 
saying  that  "When  I  observed  this  unanimity  of  opinion  I  felt 
a  delight  such  as  no  harmony  of  sounds  could  have  inspired  me 
with,"  contrasts  curiously  with  the  verdict  that  "His  Holiness 
neither  approves  nor  disapproves  ". 

The  explanation  of  the  failure  at  Ratisbon  was  fundamentally 
a  political  one.  .  Peace  with  the  Protestants  would  be  too  great 
an  advantage  for  Charles,  and  neither  Paul  nor  Francis  desired 
reunion  at  such  a  price.  Henceforth  it  is  possible  to  trace  in 
Paul's  policy  a  fantastic  tendency  to  wish  well  to  the  Protestant 
cause.  In  the  wars  of  Charles  against  the  League  of  Schmal- 
kald  the  Pope  hardly  disguised  his  disappointment  at  the 
Emperor's  success,  and  after  Charles's  victory  of  Miihlberg,  Paul 
wrote  to  Francis  an  exhortation  to  support  such  of  the  Protest- 
ant princes  as  still  held  out.  The  summons  issued  by  Paul  to 
the  Council  of  Trent  for  the  following  year  was  an  attempt  to 
reassert  the  sole  right  of  the  Pope  to  assemble  a  General  Council, 
and  at  the  same  time  to  forestall  any  attempt  of  Charles  to  do 
the  same.  It  was  clear  that  the  Council  must  be  held,  and  it 
behoved  the  Pope  to  choose  his  opportunity.  Some  delay  in  the 
preliminary  business  allowed  the  propitious  moment  to  go  by, 
and  the  Council  did  not  really  open  until  December,  1545,  when 
a  renewed  breach  between  Charles  and  the  Protestants  favoured 
Paul's  policy  once  more.  For  the  farther  Charles  and  the  Pro- 
testants could  be  kept  apart,  the  better  were  Paul's  chances  of 
driving  a  good  bargain  with  him.  In  the  interval  between  the 
first  summons  of  the  Council  and  its  actual  opening,  the  tension 
between  Paul  and  Charles  was  very  marked.     The  renewal  of  the 


THE  REFOEINIATTON  323 

war  with  France  not  only  made  the  Council  an  impossibility,  but 
it  revealed  the  Pope's  partiality  for  Francis  and  irritated  Charles 
into  an  almost  P]nglish  attitude  of  independence.  He  showed  a 
tendency  to  deal  with  the  Lutherans  himself  in  German  Diets ; 
he  even  tried  to  have  the  Council  transferred  from  Trent  to  a 
more  definitely  German  city.  The  Pope's  counter-threat  to  hold 
it  in  Rome  or  Bologna  brought  him  to  a  more  amenable  mood, 
which  Paul  seized  upon  for  the  opening  of  proceedings  in  Trent. 
Paul  HI.  could  reasonably  plead  that  a  Pope  of  nearly  eighty 
was  too  old  to  preside  at  a  Council.  His  three  presidents  were 
representative  of  the  three  chief  Cathohc  parties.  Del  Monte 
personified  the  old  regime— worldly  and  unregenerate,  and,  as 
such,  opposed  to  reform.  Cervini  belonged  to  the  narrow,  con- 
servative, high  papal  party,  zealous  for  reform  but  still  more  so 
for  definition.  Reginald  Pole  represented  the  humanistic  and 
tolerant  reform  party,  which  still  clung  to  the  hope  of  reunion 
with  the  Protestants.  His  influence  was  slight  and  his  party 
was  ineffective,  in  spite  of,  or  because  of,  its  touch  of  subtlety 
and  its  intellectuality.  Opposed  to  these  three  parties  on  politi- 
cal grounds  was  the  Emperor's  party,  from  which  the  Pope  had 
much  to  fear.  The  Imperial  programme  was  simple  enough: 
the  reform  of  the  Church  "  in  head  and  members  ".  To  circum- 
scribe its  influence  became  the  chief  object  of  the  Pope,  and  of 
all  who  felt  that  the  undiminished  authority  of  the  Papacy  was 
essential  to  the  well-being  of  Christendom.  In  the  preliminary 
business  the  issue  between  Charles  and  Paul  was  brought  to  a 
head  in  the  contest  over  the  order  of  procedure.  The  papal 
party  contended  that  the  definition  of  dogma  should  precede 
reform ;  the  Spanish  Bishops,  under  Charles's  orders,  stood  out 
for  the  precedence  of  reform.  A  compromise  determined  that 
the  two  should  first  be  dealt  with  at  the  same  time  in  separate 
commissions,  and  then  each  should  be  heard  alternately  in 
Council.  The  advantage  lay  with  the  Pope,  who,  through  the 
legates,  could  prolong  the  dogmatic  discussions  at  his  will. 

The  importance  of  the  first  period  of  the  Council  (December, 
1545— March,  1547)  is  shown  by  its  two  most  striking  features'. 
The  first  is  the  absence  of  the  Protestant  element,  and  the 
second  is  the  prominence  of  the  Jesuits.  The  Protestants  had 
nothing  to  hope  from  a  Council  held  under  the  auspices  of  a 
Pope  who  wanted  nothing  less  than  reunion,  and  an  Emperor 
who  was  at  war  with  them.  The  nearest  approach  to  Protestant- 
ism is  found  in  the  speeches  of  .Seripando,  the  mental  successor 
of  Contarini,  in  his  controversy  with  the  Jesuit  Laynez  on  the 
justification  problem.     Seripando  was  no  more  successful  than 


324  A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

Contarini  had  been.  Laynez  brought  the  battery  of  his  positiv- 
ism to  bear  on  the  delicate  framework  of  Seripando's  compro- 
mise, and  foiled  the  last  attempt  to  bridge  the  gulf  between 
Catholic  and  Protestant  doctrine.  It  was  the  first  great  victory 
of  the  Company  of  Jesus,  and  it  established  its  right  to  bear  the 
standard  of  restored  Catholicism.  The  spiritual  genius  of  Igna- 
tius Loyola  had  already  created  his  band  of  personal  followers 
into  the  organism  of  "subordination  and  mutual  supervision" 
which  was  to  rule  the  Catholic  world.  In  1540,  Paul  III.  had 
established  the  "  Company  "  as  an  Order  under  certain  conditions  ; 
having  tested  its  value,  he  confirmed  it  unconditionally  in  1543. 
The  strange  blend  of  militarism  and  mysticism  in  the  soldier- 
saint  is  reflected  in  the  wonderful  spiritual  discipline  of  the 
Jesuits.  Their  vow  of  absolute  obedience  to  the  Pope  made 
them  the  natural  "fighting  force"  of  the  new  Catholicism. 
Ignatius  had  looked  on  the  Council  of  Trent  chiefly  as  an  oppor- 
tunity for  advertisement.  The  Jesuits  were  to  vindicate  their 
claims  in  the  eyes  of  the  world :  they  were  to  preach,  but  not  to 
contend,  to  mix  with  the  world  and  not  to  off'end  it  with  excessive 
asceticism  ;  above  all,  they  were  never  to  support  any  view  which 
had  the  appearance  of  an  innovation.  The  conspicuous  successes 
of  Laynez  and  Salmeron  had  the  desired  eff'ect,  and  at  Trent  the 
Jesuits  came  into  their  kingdom.  In  Spain  they  became  the 
confessors  of  the  Court ;  in  Louvain,  Peter  Faber  laid  the  founda- 
tions of  the  Jesuit  empire  of  education,  which  was  the  firmest 
of  all  their  strongholds.  St.  Francis  Xavier  had  already  sailed 
for  the  East  Indies  to  become  the  Apostle  of  the  New  World. 
The  secret  of  the  Jesuits,  hitherto  unknown  in  community  life, 
was  the  combination  of  self-abnegation  with  free  development  of 
individuality.  The  Jesuit  was  an  instrument  of  the  finest  work- 
manship for  highly-specialised  use,  never  to  degenerate  into  a 
clumsy  tool,  never  to  foil  the  hand  of  the  Master. 

The  Council  had  not  been  entirely  amenable  to  papal  influ- 
ence, and  Paul  had  some  cause  for  apprehension.  The  question 
of  the  residence  of  Bishops  in  their  dioceses  had  produced  a 
discussion  of  papal  as  against  episcopal  authority,  in  which  the 
Spanish  Bishops  had  taken  a  leading  part.  Moreover,  the  situa- 
tion in  Germany  was  becoming  inconveniently  favourable  to 
Charles,  and  Francis  was  playing  adroitly  on  the  fears  of  the 
Pope.  At  last  Paul  tried  to  transfer  the  Council  to  Bologna  on 
the  pretext  of  an  epidemic  at  Trent.  Charles  was  furious ;  he 
ordered  the  Spanish  Bishops  to  remain  at  Trent,  and  published 
an  Interim  in  Germany  by  which  ecclesiastical  aff'airs  were  to  be 
arranged  until  the  revival  of  the  Council  of  Trent.     Paul  found 


THE  REFORMATION  325 

that  his  Council  of  Bologna  was  ignored,  so  he  suspended  it  in 
September,  1549,  and  fell  back  on  the  old  plan  of  reform  by  a 
commission  of  Cardinals. 

Troubles  of  another  kind  were  darkening  the  last  days  of  the 
old  Pope.  Among  the  many  ways  in  which  he  had  oliended 
Charles,  none  was  more  serious  than  his  grant  of  the  towns  of 
Parma  and  Piacenza  to  his  son,  Pierluigi  Farnese.  His  attempt  to 
prove  that  he  had  indemnified  the  Church  by  giving  up  Camerino 
and  Nepi  in  exchange  had  fallen  rather  iiat.  Moreover,  Pierluigi 
was  a  worthless  person  who  had  become  the  nucleus  of  anti- 
Imperial  feeling  in  Italy.  The  assassination  of  Pierluigi  in 
September,  1547,  and  the  supposed  complicity  of  the  Imperial 
Governor  of  Milan  brought  things  to  a  climax.  Paul  arranged, 
but  did  not  actually  sign,  a  close  treaty  of  alliance  with  France, 
and,  at  this  point,  Charles  published  the  Interim.  Paul's  ulti- 
mate decision  to  restore  Piacenza  to  the  Church  (and  to  its 
overlord,  the  Emperor)  led  to  a  rebellion  against  the  Pope  by  his 
grandson,  Ottavio  Farnese,  which  reduced  the  old  man  to  grief 
and  fury.  The  discovery  that  another  and  favourite  grandson 
was  also  implicated  in  the  revolt  broke  his  heart,  and,  after  a 
stormy  interview  with  the  offender,  he  died. 

Cardinal  del  Monte  was  elected,  after  a  long  conclave,  by  the 
French  and  German  parties,  combining  in  unwonted  harmony 
to  advance  the  claims  of  peace.  Julius  III.'s  pontificate  (1550- 
1555)  was  an  undistinguished  interlude  in  the  period  of  Catholic 
reconstruction.  He  had  shared  the  anti-Hapsburg  views  of  his 
predecessor,  and  he  was  not  likely  to  be  the  friend  of  reform. 
And  yet  Charles  had  supported  him,  because  from  a  knowledge 
of  his  character  he  hoped  that  he  would  be  politically  harmless, 
and  he  was  not  deceived.  In  the  new  period  of  Italian  wars  be- 
tween Charles  and  the  son  of  Francis,  Henry  II.,  Julius  took 
the  Emperor's  side,  and  sent  troops  to  help  him  to  besiege  the 
French  gan-ison  of  Mirandole.  Meanwhile,  the  Council  of  Trent 
had  been  reopened,  and  the  old  difficulties  with  the  Spanish 
bishops  were  likely  to  endanger  the  new  friendship  between 
Pope  and  Emperor.  Troubles,  too,  with  the  Protestant  envoys 
had  revealed  the  utter  hopelessness  of  attempting  any  further 
mediation.  The  rebellion  of  the  Elector  Maurice  against  Charles 
was  a  timely  relief  for  the  Pope,  and  the  Council  was  once  more 
prorogued.  From  this  point  until  his  death  in  March,  1555, 
Julius  was  entirely  absorbed  in  the  building  of  a  magnificent 
villa,  and  in  entertaining  there  witli  the  old-fashioned  geniality 
of  bygone  days.  He  made  a  truce  with  France  in  1552,  and  after- 
wards ignored  politics  as  much  as  he  could.     He  provided  for  his 


326  A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

favourite  and  for  his  relations,  but  he  did  not  embark  on  am- 
bitious schemes  on  their  behalf,  or  put  himself  to  any  trouble 
which  could  be  avoided.  The  successor  of  Julius  III.  .was  his 
fellow-president  at  Trent,  who  took  the  name  of  Marcellus  II. 
He  was  elected  for  his  "  goodness  and  matchless  wisdom,"  but 
"the  world  was  not  worthy  of  him,"  and,  on  the  twenty-second 
day  of  his  pontificate,  he  died. 

With  the  election  of  Caraffa  as  Paul  IV.,  the  Catholic  Re- 
formation began  its  independent  life,  free  from  the  blasts  of 
Protestantism,  and  untrammelled  by  the  gentle  winds  of  tolera- 
tion. The  Papacy  was  no  longer  to  spend  itself  in  controversy 
with  heterodoxy ;  it  accepted  the  situation  in  Germany,  Geneva, 
and  England,  and  left  the  sword  to  decide  the  debatable  lands 
of  the  Netherlands  and  France.  Catholicism  in  its  new  phase 
had  no  more  to  say  to  Lutheranism,  since  Luther  had  merged 
his  cause  in  the  party  struggles  of  Germany.  The  struggle 
with  Calvinism  was  more  vital,  for  Calvin  was  a  better  states- 
man, if  a  lesser  theologian,  than  Luther,  and  Geneva  was 
a  serious  rival  for  the  Jesuits  in  the  field  of  education  and  influ- 
ence. From  Geneva — "  the  mine  whence  came  the  ore  of 
heresy" — France  was  drawing  a  steady  supply  of  Protestant 
teachers,  each  of  whom  was  a  finished  product  of  spiritual  cul- 
ture. For  Calvin,  like  Ignatius,  used  none  but  the  best,  and, 
unlike  Luther,  kept  his  system  clear  of  parasite  causes.  By  the 
second  half  of  the  sixteenth  century  the  Protestant  Reformation 
had  finished  its  part  in  the  history  of  the  Papacy.  It  would  be 
idle  to  deny  the  undoubted  influence  on  the  Catholic  world  of 
the  saints  of  the  Reformation.  Catholics  like  Contarini  were 
not  slow  to  recognise  "the  finger  of  God  "  among  the  Protestants, 
and  in  a  real  sense  the  Papacy  owed  its  salvation  to  its  opponents. 
It  needed  the  clarion  of  militant  righteousness  to  waken  the 
Popes  from  the  dream  of  Renaissance  beauty  to  meet  the  dawn 
of  modern  Europe  in  the  might  of  restored  religion. 


PART  V 
THE  PAPACY  IN  MODERN  HISTORY 


T^ 


CHAPTER  XXVII 
THE  COUNTER-REFORMATION,  a.d.  15B5-1605 

HE  election  of  Caraffa  as  Paul  IV.  in  May,  1555,  was  the 

I  opportunity  for  which  the  "  conservative  "  Reformation 

party  had  been  waiting,  and  which  it  had  just  missed  in 
the  pontificate  of  Paul 'III.  Here  at  last  was  a  reforming  Pope 
whose  character  and  opinions  were  not  inconsistent.  At  the  age 
of  79,  though  still  young  in  temperament,  he  was  the  tried 
friend  of  the  Oratory  party,  and  his  severe  and  unbending 
nature  was  an  expression  of  the  new  Catholic  ideal.  He  had 
helped  to  found  the  order  of  the  Theatines,  which  was  converting 
the  worldly  priesthood  of  Renaissance  Rome  into  the  self- 
sacrificing  instrument  of  the  new  Catholicism.  He  had  restored 
and  presided  over  the  Inquisition,  which  he  loved  and  cherished 
as  an  artilleryman  loves  his  gun.  It  was  he  who  had  sent 
St.  Ignatius  to  Rome,  and  so  ushered  the  Jesuits  into  history.  He 
was  one  of  the  best  haters  the  world  has  ever  known.  He  hated 
every  heretic  with  emotional  intensity;  he  hated  Reginald  Pole 
for  his  moderation ;  supremely  he  hated  Charles  V.,  on  grounds 
religious,  political,  and  personal.  As  a  Caraffa,  he  belonged  to  a 
family  which  was  traditionally  anti-Spanish,  and  a  personal 
quarrel  with  the  Spanish  ruling  party  had  already  brought  Paul 
up  against  Charles,  in  consequence  of  which  he  had  been  ejected 
from  the  Neapolitan  Council.  A  still  fiercer  antagonism 
animated  his  view  of  Charles's  religious  position,  for  Paul 
believed  that  the  Emperor's  zeal  for  reforming  the  Papacy  was 
merely  a  desire  to  stand  well  with  the  Protestants  and  to  play 
into  their  hands.  Through  the  hatred  which  ruled  the  pontificate 
of  Paul  shot  a  nobler  gleam  of  Italian  patriotism,  for  he  was  an 
idealist,  and  he  loved  to  recall  tlie  days  of  Italy's  freedom  when 
the  harmony  of  the  "  four  strings  " — Naples,  Milan,  Venice,  and 
Rome — was  still  undisturbed. 

In  this  spirit  was  conceived  his  alliance  with  France,  "  to  free 
this  poor  Italy  from  the  tyranny  of  Spain  ".  With  this  end  in 
view  Carlo  Carafifa,  Paul's  unworthy  nephew,  went  to  France  to 

329 


330  A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

buy  the  intriguing  parties.  His  hatred  of  Charles  was  made  to 
cover  a  multitude  of  sins,  and  won  for  him  the  Cardinalate. 
Two  other  nephews  adopted  the  same  remunerative  politics,  and 
won  for  themselves  the  Colonna  castles,  while  their  mother 
dreamed  of  royal  marriages  for  her  daughters.  So  Paul  became 
a  nepotist,  in  spite  of  his  ideals,  not  out  of  domestic  affection, 
but  out  of  political  hate.  The  resignation  of  Charles  V.  had 
made  no  difference  to  his  plans,  for  in  Philip  II.  there  was  still  a 
Hapsburg  to  oppose,  and  the  quarrel  was  already  a  feud.  The 
Pope's  eagerness  for  war  was  not  an  indication  of  his  readiness 
to  make  it.  When  Alva  marched  on  Rome  in  1556,  the  papal 
army  fled,  and  only  the  scruples  of  the  Imperial  commander 
saved  Rome  from  another  sack.  The  arrival  of  the  forces  of 
France  led  to  another  expedition,  with  the  papal  army  on  the 
offensive.  But  Alva's  success  was  more  decisive  than  before,  and 
the  news  of  the  battle  of  St.  Quentin  was  followed  by  the  recall 
of  the  French  for  fighting  in  France.  Alva  made  the  submission 
of  a  true  Catholic  in  September,  1557,  and  the  Pope  was  let  off 
easily  with  the  restoration  of  the  Colonna  castles ;  but  the  might 
of  Spain  was  held  to  be  invincible. 

Thwarted  in  the  one  passion,  Paul  gave  vent  to  the  other. 
The  ferocity  of  the  Inquisition  in  the  years  1558-1589  bore  the 
impression  of  his  own  enthusiasm.  The  Holy  Oflftce  for  the 
Universal  Church  was  his  own  project,  which  he  had  persuaded 
Paul  HI.  to  establish  at  Rome  in  1542,  on  the  Spanish  model. 
Its  functions  had  often  been  applied  to  political  purposes,  and 
for  this  reason  it  was  already  unpopular.  Paul  IV.  did  not 
recognise  any  definite  line  between  political  and  religious 
offences :  it  would  indeed  have  been  difficult  if  not  impossible  to 
draw  one.  But  he  did  not  allow  personal  considerations  to  stand 
in  the  light  of  what  he  considered  his  duty.  He  gradually 
became  aware  of  the  bad  conduct  of  his  nephews,  whose  services 
he  had  relied  upon  against  Spain.  They  were  the  scandal  of 
Rome,  and  Paul's  colleagues  of  the  reform  party  spared  him  no 
knowledge  of  their  misdeeds,  when  they  found  an  opening  for 
enlightening  him.  Suspicion  deepened  into  certainty,  and  the 
Pope  did  not  spare  his  own  feelings  or  his  own  family  pride.  He 
denounced  his  nephews  in  a  consistory,  described  their  misdeeds, 
and  banished  them  without  pity,  with  all  their  dependents  and 
belongings.  He  listened  to  no  appeal,  even  from  the  old  mother 
of  the  exiles.  "  He  feels  no  pity :  he  appears  to  retain  no 
memory  of  his  kindred,"  was  the  comment  of  a  courtier. 

In  the  last  six  months  of  his  life,  he  gave  himself  entirely  to 
the  interests  of  reform.     The  court  was  reorganised,  and  useless 


THE  COUNTER-KEFORMATION  331 

offices  were  abolislied.  A  "  post-oflice  "  for  grievances  was  set  up 
in  a  public  place,  and  the  Pope  kept  the  key  of  it.  Begging  in 
the  Churches  was  forbidden,  and  fasting  was  enjoined  on  the 
court.  Services  were  beautified :  pictures  were  censored.  And 
week  by  week,  on  Thursdays,  the  Holy  Office  went  its  relentless 
way,  by  cross-examination,  by  torture,  and  by  autos  dafe,  sparing 
no  one — working  the  leaven  of  heresy  out  of  the  Church  under 
the  pitiless  eye  of  the  old  Pope. 

Pius  IV.  was  elected  in  1559  as  a  protest  against  his 
predecessor.  He  was  an  easy-going  person  who  had  risen  to 
influence  as  the  satellite  of  an  adventurer-brother.  His  natural 
inclinations  were  for  peace  at  all  costs,  but  in  practice  his  policy 
was  modified  by  the  influence  of  the  worthiest  of  nepotates,  the 
sainted  Carlo  Borromeo.  The  bonhomie  of  the  Pope  reacted  on 
the  rigidity  of  his  nephew,  and  the  blend  was  not  particularly 
eftective.  On  the  whole,  things  went  on  very  much  in  the  same 
way  as  under  Paul  IV.  The  Inquisition  did  its  work  just  as 
thoroughly,  although  the  new  Pope  was  less  interested  in  its 
proceedings.  Carlo  was  painstaking  and  efficient  in  the  admin- 
istration, and  resolute  in  his  determination  not  to  abuse  his 
position.  The  unwonted  quiet  in  Europe,  which  the  peace  of 
Cateau  Cambresis  had  produced,  remained  undisturbed  by  the 
Papacy,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  it  pointed  undeniably  to  a 
Council.  One  solitary  act  of  violence  heralded  the  peace.  The 
unfortunate  Carafta  clan  were  pursued  with  vengeance  for  their 
evil  deeds,  and  we  cannot  doubt  that  the  death  of  the  Cardinal 
and  his  three  relations — well-deserved  as  it  may  have  been — was 
to  a  certain  extent  a  payment  of  old  scores. 

The  reign  of  Pius  IV.  is  chiefly  important  because  it  was  the 
last  and  most  vital  period  of  the  Council  of  Trent.  The  Council 
reopened  under  five  presidents,  three  of  whom  were  whole- 
hearted supporters  of  the  papal  autocracy,  and  two — the  Cardinal 
of  Mantua  and  Seripando — were  broad-minded  upholders  of 
conciliation.  No  Protestant  party  appeared  at  all,  and  the 
business  of  the  Council  was  purely  Catholic  and  internal.  The 
more  liberal  party  was  headed  by  the  Emperor  Ferdinand,  and 
supported  by  the  French  Bishops.  Their  schemes  were  national 
and  old-fashioned,  based  on  the  plans  of  Constance.  They  were 
inclined  to  insist  on  the  rights  of  ambassadors  as  against 
legates,  and  they  asked  boldly  for  sweeping  doctrinal  concessions, 
the  principal  ones  being  the  Communion  in  both  kinds  and  the 
marriage  of  the  clergy.  To  counteract  them  Pius,  at  the 
suggestion  of  his  legates,  poured  Italian  Bishops  into  Trent,  and 
so  outnumbered  the  petitioners.     In  the  end  the  Papacy  was 


332  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

bound  to  win,  for  Philip's  Spanish  Bishops,  although  they  shared 
the  German  views  about  the  authority  of  the  Pope,  were  alienated 
from  them  by  the  doctrinal  questions  on  their  programme.  The 
views  which  estranged  them  were  more  vital  than  those  on  which 
they  were  united,  and  the  result  was  that  the  discord  grew,  while 
each  separately  inclined  towards  peace  with  the  common  foe. 
By  February,  1563,  a  point  had  been  reached  at  which  continual 
hostility  and  occasional  bloodshed  punctuated  the  treatises  of 
rival  theologians.  It  became  obvious  that  "  in  Trent,  opinions 
only  met  and  fought ;  their  sources  were  at  Rome  and  at  the 
courts  of  the  several  Princes".  If  the  Council  was  to  be  worth 
anything  it  was  to  make  opinion,  and  so  in  April  Cardinal 
Morone  undertook  a  delicate  mission  to  the  Emperor.  He  found 
the  Emperor  angry  and  pugnacious,  insisting  on  the  freedom  of 
ambassadors  to  introduce  whatever  subjects  they  pleased 
without  submitting  them  to  the  legates.  He  rightly  felt  that 
the  freedom  of  the  Council  depended  on  this.  But  Morone,  with 
the  Jesuits  at  work  behind  him,  soothed  Ferdinand  and  his  party 
with  compromises,  and  dwelt  skilfully  on  the  advantages  of 
union  with  the  Papacy.  "  The  matter  was,"  explained  Morone, 
"to  hit  upon  such  decisions  as  might  satisfy  the  Emperor 
without  trenching  on  the  authority  of  the  Pope  or  the  legates." 
In  the  end  an  agreement  was  arrived  at,  by  which  the  legates 
were  to  bring  forward  any  subject  suggested  by  the  ambassadors, 
and  preparatory  deputations  were  to  meet  in  national  com- 
mittees. In  this  way  the  initiative  of  the  legates  was  safe- 
guarded, and  the  integrity  of  the  Council  preserved.  From  this 
point  the  Council  "began  to  change  its  aspect  and  to  be  much 
more  easy  to  treat  with,"  according  to  Morone.  The  growing 
influence  of  the  Guises  in  France  and  the  importance  of  the 
Pope's  favour  to  Philip  in  Spain  contributed  to  the  papal 
triumph.  In  December,  1563,  the  Council  was  dissolved  amid 
"  tears  of  gladness  "  for  the  restoration  of  Catholic  peace. 

The  importance  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  and  its  epitome,  the 
"  Tridentina,"  does  not  depend  on  the  extent  to  which  it  was 
recognised.  France  and  Spain  clung  to  their  Galilean  liberties 
and  royal  spiritualities  as  before.  The  German  Empire  gave  it 
no  formal  recognition.  Elizabeth  of  England,  whose  coquetry 
did  not  stop  short  in  the  religious  sphere,  was  behaving  in  a 
way  to  make  the  Catholic  refugees  at  Lou  vain  appeal  to  the 
Council  for  her  deposition.  But  the  Council  had  dispelled  for 
ever  the  darkness  and  obscurity  of  mediseval  Catholicism.  The 
work  of  doctrinal  definition,  for  which  the  Jesuits  at  Trent  were 
chiefly  responsible,  had  shut  a  door  in  the  face  of  the  Protestants 


THE  COUNTEE-REFOKMATTON  333 

and  given  the  Catholics  within  a  now  sense  of  patriotism.  Tt 
armed  every  CatlioHc  layman  with  a  new  assurance,  and  sent 
him  forth  to  the  wars  of  Religion.  It  meant  for  Europe  the 
mobilisation  of  Catholicism.  For  the  Papacy,  the  victory  was 
shown  in  the  fact  that  reorganisation  had  supplanted  restriction 
as  the  watchword  of  reform,  and  the  change  was  all  in  favour 
of  the  Pope's  prerogative.  The  hierarchy  became  more  depend- 
ent through  its  changed  decrees  of  consecration,  the  episcopal 
vow  of  absolute  obedience,  and  the  reforms  introduced  by  the 
seminaries.  A  most  important  discretionary  power  was  left  with 
the  Pope  for  the  interpretation  of  the  decrees  of  Trent,  and  the 
general  finishing  up  of  the  work  which  was  left  over.  Among 
these  "  finishing  touches  "  was  the  compiling  of  the  new  Index, 
a  most  important  piece  of  work,  which  was  completed  in  1564, 
and  after  one  revision  in  1596,  became  the  standai-d  until  the 
eighteenth  century.  The  reform  of  Church  music  was  another 
legacy  from  the  Council  to  the  Pope  and  in  the  exquisite  work 
of  Palestrina  we  find  the  truest  artistic  expression  of  the  Catholic 
restoration. 

After  the  Council  of  Trent  the  old  Pope  relaxed  his  good 
intentions :  he  became  more  fond  of  his  dinner  and  more  prone 
to  make  bad  jokes.  A  conspiracy  against  his  life,  led  by  the 
fanatic,  Benedetto  Accolti,  failed  when  it  came  to  the  point 
because  the  conspirators  were  over-awed  by  the  outward  majesty 
of  the  restored  Papacy.  Carlo  Borromeo  carried  on  the  work  of 
government  faithfully  as  before  and  with  undistinguished  dis- 
cretion. When  his  uncle  died,  in  1565,  Carlo  managed  to  secure 
the  election  of  one  for  whom  he  had  a  greater  respect,  and  who 
was  already  well  known  in  Rome  for  his  piety  and  asceticism. 
The  accession  of  Pius  V.  was  a  day  of  promise  for  the  Catholic 
world — all  the  more  so  because  the  sanctity  which  won  his 
recognition  as  "  St.  Alessandrino "  was  not  of  the  kind  which 
transcends  the  imagination  of  his  contemporaries.  He  was 
gentle  and  good,  with  something  of  the  same  yearning  after  God 
which  was  seen  in  Gregory  I.  He  was  like  him,  too,  in  finding 
the  Papacy  a  hindrance  to  the  inner  life  of  the  Pope,  as  also  in 
his  sudden  siirprising  severity,  and  equally  surprising  tenderness. 
But  Pius  V.  lacked  the  wide  humanity  of  Gregory  the  Great, 
and  above  all,  the  grace  of  humour.  He  thought  that  men 
grew  worse  instead  of  better,  and  he  punished  them  in  later  life 
with  the  Inquisition  for  the  sins  of  their  youth.  He  owed  much 
to  the  devoted  service  of  the  Bishops,  who  now  resided  in  their 
Sees  according  to  the  decrees  of  Trent.  Among  them  were  men 
like  Giberti  of  Verona,    whose   life   was   a   mirror   of  restored 


334  A   SHOKT  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

Catholicism,  and  Carlo  Borromeo,  who,  as  Archbishop  of  Milan, 
dedicated  his  genius  for  loyalty  to  the  Pope  whom  he  had 
made. 

In  the  pontificate  of  Pius  V.,  the  eflTects  of  the  Council  of 
Trent  became  apparent,  particularly  in  two  ways.  The  first 
of  these  was  the  disregard  of  the  heretic  world,  except  as  a 
field  for  Jesuit  missions.  In  Germany,  the  Religious  Peace  of 
Augsburg  (1555)  tended  more  and  more  to  become  a  landmark, 
although  the  Papacy  persistently  ignored  it.  The  principle  of 
"  Cujus  Regio  ejus  Religio"  was  too  convenient  to  be  lightly  set 
aside,  if  only  because  it  gave  something  definite  to  fight  for.  It 
imposed  no  degree  of  toleration,  except  in  an  international 
sense,  while  it  sanctioned  the  "Divine  Right"  of  Princes  to 
establish  their  own  religion  and  secure  uniformity  within  their 
dominions  by  persecuting  in  whichever  direction  they  pleased. 
France  was  absorbed  in  the  three-cornered  intrigue  of  the  Valois, 
the  Guises,  and  the  Bourbons.  The  struggle  between  Catholic 
and  Huguenot  was  caught  up  in  the  tangled  skein  of  politics, 
and  Pius  did  his  best  to  hold  on  to  the  thread  of  papal  interests. 
He  sent  an  army  to  France  under  the  astonishing  order  to  give 
no  quarter  to  Huguenots.  In  the  same  spirit  he  sent  a  hat  and 
a  sword  to  Alva  as  a  token  of  gratitude  for  his  bloody  services 
to  the  true  religion  in  the  Netherlands.  Pius  has  been  accused 
of  complicity  in  the  darker  designs  which  led  to  the  massacre 
of  St.  Bartholomew,  soon  after  his  death  in  1572.  There  is  no 
evidence  that  he  had  any  direct  part  in  the  crime  for  which  his 
whole  generation  is  branded,  but  it  is  unlikely  that  it  would 
have  troubled  his  conscience,  or  that  of  the  average  good 
Catholic  or  Protestant  of  his  day.  Although  his  successor, 
Clement  VIII.,  spoke  of  it  as  the  "  most  joyful  day  "  for  Catholics, 
it  was  a  barren  victory,  too  dearly  bought,  for  which  the  Papacy 
has  paid,  perhaps,  an  unfair  price.  For  if  the  sufi'ering  of  St. 
Bartholomew  fell  upon  France,  the  injury  was  to  Catholicism, 
while  the  shame  can  only  be  ascribed  to  the  spirit  of  the  age. 
It  was  the  consequence  of  the  monarchical  theory  which  the 
Protestants  had  applied  to  religion  by  the  "Cujus  Regio"  prin- 
ciple pushed  to  its  terrible  conclusion  by  the  ruthless  logic  of 
France. 

In  England  alone  the  religious  question  was  still  open  in  the 
reign  of  Pius.  While,  on  the  one  hand,  the  reign  of  Edward  VI. 
had  "  worn  the  gloss  off"  the  new  theology,"  the  persecutions  of 
Mary  had  "  lit  such  a  fire  in  England  as  should  never  be  put 
out ".  It  remained  for  Elizabeth  "  to  keep  the  mean  between 
the  two  extremes  "  (Preface  to  Prayer-book).      This  she  con- 


THE  COUNTER-REFOmrATION  335 

trived  to  do  until  Pius  lost  his  patience,  and  deposed  her  in  1570. 
The  deposition  was  a  fatal  mistake,  for  its  only  eflect  in  Eng- 
land was  to  popularise  the  persecution  of  the  Catholics  in  a 
peace-loving  land.  Scotland  had  already  seceded,  and  with  un- 
characteristic impulsiveness,  which  astonished  even  the  con- 
verts, embraced  the  Calvinism  of  John  Knox  in  1560.  "  It  is 
almost  miraculous,"  said  a  Scottish  Protestant,  "to  see  how  the 
Word  of  God  takes  place  in  Scotland." 

The  second  general  result  of  the  Council  of  Trent  was  the 
changed  position  of  the  Papacy  in  Europe.  The  Pope  ceases 
henceforth  to  create  politics  on  his  own  account :  he  is  content, 
except  in  Italy,  to  influence  them.  The  nepotates  of  the  future 
no  longer  aspire  to  be  independent  princes  of  the  Cesare  Borgia 
type :  they  aim  at  power  of  another  kind.  The  Cardinal- 
nephews  of  the  end  of  the  sixteenth  century  are  hardly  less 
prominent  or  less  magnificent  than  their  predecessors,  but  they 
are  the  confidential  officials  of  the  Vatican,  and  not  the  par- 
venu rulers  of  mushroom  States.  But  the  chief  instruments 
of  papal  foreign  policy  in  the  restored  Catholic  States  were  the 
Jesuits.  In  the  Empire  and  in  Catholic  Germany  they  absorbed 
State  offices  and  reclaimed  lost  ground  ;  in  France  their  influence 
threaded  in  and  out  of  the  Catholic  parties.  In  Spain  their 
power  had  brought  them  into  collision  with  Philip,  whose  abso- 
lutism was  always  at  war  with  his  fanaticism.  No  Hapsburg 
could  tolerate  an  "  Imperium  in  imperio,"  and  the  Spanish 
Jesuits  were  not  diffident  of  claiming  to  be  outside  the  royal 
prerogative. 

Like  the  Jesuits,  Pius  V.  was  united  to  Philip  by  his  Catholi- 
cism and  estranged  from  him  by  his  politics.  The  power  of 
Spain  in  Milan  and  Naples  was  a  perpetual  reminder  of  the 
sack  of  Rome,  and  it  drove  Pius  into  a  close  alliance  with 
Florence.  Cosimo  de'  Medici  was  an  unsuitable  friend  for  a 
Pope  given  to  sanctity,  but  Pius  chose  not  to  think  of  this  when 
he  made  him  Grand  Duke  of  Tuscany  and  adopted  him  as  an 
ally.  Cosimo  proved  his  Catholic  zeal  by  the  surrender  of  his 
friend  Carnesecchi  to  the  mercies  of  the  Inquisition.  Carnesecchi 
was  the  last  of  the  liberal  Catholic  reform  party,  the  friend  of 
Giulia  Gonzaga,  and  the  leader  of  the  dwindling  coterie  which 
had  once  held  the  hopes  of  the  reunion  of  Christendom  in  its 
keeping.  He  and  his  friends  had  drawn  nearer  to  Protestantism 
as  the  Catholic  reformers  receded  behind  their  own  barriers,  but 
neither  his  goodness  nor  his  popularity  could  save  him  from  the 
retributive  justice  of  Pius.  He  was  imprisoned,  tortured,  and 
condemned  on  charges  of  which  he  had  been  acquitted  long 


336  A  SHOET  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

before,  and  in  1567  he  was  executed  in  spite  of  all  Cosimo  could 
do  to  save  him. 

The  greatest  political  achievement  of  Pius  was  his  stand 
against  the  Turks.  In  face  of  the  growing  peril  of  Europe  he 
contrived  to  effect  an  alliance  between  Spain  and  Venice,  those 
deadly  rivals  of  the  sea,  and  he  was  rewarded  for  his  efforts  by 
Don  John's  victory  of  Lepanto  in  1571,  which  stemmed  the  tide 
of  Turkish  success,  and  fixed  the  limit  of  infidel  power  in  the 
Mediterranean.  It  was  the  great  moment  of  his  life,  and  he 
died  before  the  glamour  of  it  faded. 

Gregory  XIII.  (1572-1585)  was  an  old  jurist  of  Bologna  with  a 
doubtful  reputation  and  a  grown-up  son.  His  pontificate  was 
not  a  reversion  to  the  old  ways  of  the  Papacy,  for  his  education 
in  the  new  principles  was  thoroughly  undertaken  and  well 
carried  out  by  the  Jesuits  and  Theatines  about  him.  They  read 
him  the  edifying  letters  of  Pius  V.,  and  stimulated  in  him  a  spirit 
of  competitive  holiness  which  passed  very  easily  for  personal 
piety.  His  relations  were  kept  at  first  at  a  distance  :  even  his 
old  brother  was  forbidden  to  visit  him,  and  reduced  to  tears  of 
disappointment  because  he  might  not  see  the  prosperity  of  his 
family.  His  son  Giacomo,  happily  not  an  ambitious  person, 
was  at  first  ignored,  and  later  allowed  to  become  a  noble  of 
Venice  and  to  marry  into  a  noble  house.  Two  young  nephews 
became  Cardinals  while  the  Jesuits  looked  the  other  way,  but 
even  they  were  used  rather  than  favoured. 

His  policy  was  deep,  but  it  worked  in  hidden  ways  and 
showed  no  conspicuous  features.  His  was  the  era  of  papal  plots 
in  England  and  Ireland,  which  really  lit  the  candle  of  anti- 
Popery  in  this  country  more  than  the  fires  of  Oxford.  In  days 
when  none  would  seriously  complain  if  the  Pope  or  anyone  else 
chose  to  burn  heretics,  England  conceived  a  deep  hatred  for  the 
disturbers  of  her  peace,  and  it  was  more  than  suspected  that 
Philip's  designs  against  Elizabeth  were  drafted  in  Rome. 
Gregory's  firm  alliance  with  the  Guises  in  France  was  a  further 
source  of  suspicion,  for  the  Guises  were  the  mainspring  of  the 
plots  which  emanated  from  Scotland,  and  the  go-betweens  of 
Philip  and  Mary  Stuart.  The  close  connection  with  the  Guises 
established  by  Gregory  through  his  Jesuits  was  the  foundation 
of  the  Catholic  league,  which  first  showed  its  activities  in  France 
in  1576. 

In  his  home  government  Gregory  had  to  face  troubles  which 
had  been  a  long  time  brewing  in  connection  with  finance.  The 
work  of  Catholic  restoration  was  expensive,  and  the  reformed 
Papacy  had  fewer  ways  of  getting  money  within  its  reach  than 


THE  COUNTER-KEFOKMATION  337 

in  the  unregenerate  days  of  the  Renaissance.     Gregory  spent 
lavishly  in  every  direction  and  on  the  worthiest  objects.    Educa- 
tion absorbed  huge  sums  :  the  Jesuits'  College  in  Rome  blossomed 
out  into  a  '-seminary  of  all  nations".     The  Pope  endowed  a 
German  college  and  founded  an  English  one.     He  also  endowed 
a  Greek  college,  in  which  national  customs  were  preserved,  so 
that  the  Greek  boys  should  go  back  to  their  own  people  as 
Catholic  missionaries  without  the  hindrance  of  a  broken  tradi- 
tion.    Still  larger  sums  went  to  the  wars  of  religion— to  Charles 
IX.  for  the  suppression  of  the  Huguenots— to  the  Grand  Master 
of  Malta  for  use  against  the  Turks.      The  "congregation"  of 
Cardinals  which  dealt  with  finance  had  to  find  a  new  revenue 
to  meet  the  new  expenses.     The  reform  of  the  Pope's  household, 
which  Pius  V.  had  conscientiously  carried  out,  cost  much  more 
than  it  saved,  for  the  corruption  under  the  old  regime  was  profit- 
able  beyond  belief.     The  new  methods  of  raising  money  which 
the  Curia  adopted  were  those  which  were  fashionable  among  the 
new  monarchies  of  Europe,  but  they  were  always  dangerous,  and 
in  the  case  of  the  Papacy— unsupported  by  any  large  or  reliable 
army— nearly  fatal.     Old  privileges  were  abolished  or  confirmed 
in  return  for  heavy  payment.     Forgotten  feudal  claims  of  the 
Popes  were  revived  and  suddenly  enforced.     Confiscations  were 
made  on  the  pretext  of  escheat.    The  result  was  that  dispossessed 
or  ofi'ended  nobles  took  to  the  countryside  and  became  bandits. 
They  terrorised  the  March  of  Ancona,  and  swept  across  the 
Campagna  in  defiance  of  civilisation.      Gregory  sent   his   son 
Giacomo  and  Cardinal  Sforza  against  the  banditti,  but  without 
success.     When  the  banditti  were  pressed  by  the  papal  forces  they 
crossed  the  border  of  some  neighbouring  State  where  their  griev- 
ances met  with  sympathy  from  others  Avho  had  shared  them. 
For  Gregory  had  offended  all  his  neighbours  by  his  impolitic 
extortions.     Even  Cosimo  de'  Medici  turned  against  him,  and 
compelled  him  to  pardon  the  most  dangerous  of  all  the  bandits, 
a  Piccolomini  who  had  paralysed  Gregory's  action  by  threatening 
the  life  of  Giacomo.     It  took  a  stronger  man  than  Gregory  to 
combat  the  wind  which  he  had  sown.     His  successor,  Sixtus  V., 
dealt  with  the  bandit  problem  in  the  drastic  and  competent  way 
in  which  he  faced  all  the  problems  of  his  short  and  brilliant 
pontificate  (1585-1590).     He  conciliated  the  neighbour  States  by 
removing  the  burdens  which  Gregory  had  placed  on  them,  and 
then,  having  cut  off  their  retreat,  he  faced  the  bandits  boldly. 
In  two  years  he  freed  Italy  from  the  curse  of  outlawTy.     He 
executed  the  most  awe-inspiring  of  the  robber  chiefs  and  all  who 
had  helped  them.     He  spread  terror  in  the  papal  cities  by  his 


338  A  SHOET  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

severity  in  the  maintenance  of  order.  He  condemned  four  youths 
to  death  for  carrying  arms  and  another  for  resisting  the  police. 
People  were  horrified  at  his  measures  and  gratified  by  the  results. 
"  This  security  is  of  great  good  to  the  peaceful  public,"  said  an 
eye-witness. 

The  early  life  of  Sixtus  V.  was  a  vigil,  from  which  he  came 
forth  prepared  for  action.     All  his  life  he  had  been  conscious  of 
the  call  of  God:   in  his  peasant-childhood  it  had  led  him  to 
become  a  Franciscan;   as  a  young  man  it  had  made  him  the 
popular  preacher  of  Rome,  and  had  involved  him  in  trouble  with 
the  Inquisition  through  mysterious  and  disquieting  experiences 
in  the  pulpit.     As  he  believed  in  himself,  so  others  believed  in 
him :  he  won  over  the  Chief  of  the  Holy  Office,  and  he  gained 
the  confidence  of  Pius  V.     He  became  General  of  the  Franciscans, 
Cardinal  di  Montalto,  and  Bishop  of  Fermo.     Towards  Gregory 
X;iII.  he  had  a  deep  antipathy,  and  during  his  predecessor's  pon- 
tificate he  stayed  in  his  See,  brooding,  writing,  and  thinking 
deeply.     When  he  became  Pope  at  the  age  of  sixty-four  he  lost 
no  time  in  putting  thought  into  action.     There  was  nothing 
tentative   about   his   policy,  as  his  deahngs  with   the  bandits 
proved.     The  difficulty  was  that  it  was  expensive,  and  Sixtus 
was  unwilling  to  adopt  the  unpopular  financial  measures  of  his 
predecessor.     Instead  of  these  he  instituted  the  system  of  Monti, 
or  public  loans,  which  were  to  be  the  basis  of  papal  finance  for 
many  years  to  come.     These  funds,  supplemented  by  others  de- 
rived from  the  sale  of  offices  and  from  very  heavy  taxation, 
gave  Sixtus  a  large  revenue,  but  economics  was  not  his  strong 
point ;  they  failed  to  pass  the  standard  of  criticism  even  of  his 
contemporaries,  who  drew  attention  to  the  absurd  gold  hoard 
which  it  was  his  pride  to  heap  up  in  St.  Angelo,  while  the  Monti 
loans  crippled  him  by  their  weight. 

The  main  objects  for  which  Sixtus  wanted  money  were  the 
wars  against  the  Turks  and  the  heretics.  Round  these  two 
objects  his  pohtics  turned.  Spain  was  necessary  to  both;  and 
therefore  Sixtus  was  careful  not  to  ofi'end  Philip,  although  he 
was  just  as  much  afraid  of  Spanish  influence  in  Italy  as  his  pre- 
decessors had  been.  France  was  likely  to  be  the  bone  of  contention, 
for  Philip  of  Spain  had  everything  to  gain  by  prolonging  the  Wars 
of  Religion  in  France,  whereas  Sixtus  knew  that  a  strong  and  united 
France  was  necessary  to  curb  the  power  of  Spain.  A  further  and 
more  fantastic  aim  which  Sixtus  had  in  view,  and  which  also  en- 
dangered his  relations  with  Philip,  was  the  conversion  of  Eliza- 
beth. He  had  conceived  an  admiration  for  the  indomitable 
woman,  so  like  himself  in  her  attitude  to  her  enemies,  of  which  he 


THE  COUNTER-REFOEMATION  339 

was  the  chief.  To  restore  England  to  Catholicism  by  transforming 
il^hzabeth  Hito  a  "  second  Countess  Matilda,"  to  whom  lie  should 
play  Hildebrand,  was  a  project  which  Elizabeth  would  liave  de- 
lighted to  play  up  to,  but  it  was  based  on  a  complete  misconcep- 
tion of  her  character.  In  the  end  Sixtus  found  out  his  mistake 
and,  after  playing  off  the  English  designs  of  France  against  Philip's 
schemes  of  conquest,  he  finally  supported  the  Spanish  Armada 
with  all  his  might.  But  he  was  never  very  sanguine  about 
1  hihp  s  enterprise :  he  alternately  scolded  him  for  procrastina- 
tion and  encouraged  him  with  sums  of  money.  The  death  of 
Mary  Queen  of  Scots  was  Elizabeth's  challenge  to  the  Pope,  and 
the  Armada  was  the  answer.  When  the  Armada  fell  to  pieces 
Sixtus  shared  tlie  defeat  of  an  ally  whom  he  despised  and  feared 
by  an  enemy  whom  he  respected  and  knew  to  be  the  stronger. 

Towards  the  struggle  in  France  Sixtus  was  very  guarded.     At 
first  he  seemed  inclined  to  follow  Philip  in  his  support  of  the 
Guises,  and  in  1585  he  declared  Henry  of  Navarre  and  Conde  to 
be  excluded  from  the  succession  as  heretics.     The  Italian  States 
—and  particularly  Venice— were  anxious  to  reconcile  Sixtus  with 
the  King  of  Navarre,  because  Henry  was  anti-Spanish,  and  his 
succession  to  the  throne  would  put  an  end  to  Philip's  interference 
in  French  politics.     But  the  revolt  of  Paris  and  the  murder  of 
Cardinal  Guise  pledged  Sixtus  more  deeply  to  the  League      It 
was  not  until  the  battle  of  Ivry  in  1590  gave  the  victory  to  Henry, 
who,  at  the  same  time,  showed  an  inclination  to  be  converted' 
that  Sixtus  reversed  his  policy.     At  the  time  of  his  death,  he  was 
allied  to  Henry  of  Navarre,  to  the  consternation  of  Philip  and 
the  rejoicing  of  the  Italian  States,  who  saw  in  his  French  policy 
a  patriotic  step  towards  emancipation  from  Spanish  leadership 
Many   Popes   since   Clement  VII.   had  been    accused   of  being 
"Spanish  chaplains,"  and  the  Hapsburg   bonds  were  hard  to 
break.     Even  Sixtus  dared  not  quarrel  with  Philip  or  with  his 
German   cousins.      He   had   to   preserve   a   rigid   neutrality  in 
Poland,  where  the  Archduke  Maximilian  was  at  war  with  Sigis- 
mund  of  Sweden.     In  his  relations  to  the  Emperor  Rudolf  II.  he 
was  less  cautious,  and  the  support  which  he  gave  to  the  League 
nearly  produced  serious  trouble. 

It  was  in  Itahan  affairs  that  Sixtus  was  seen  at  his  best.  In 
spite  of  Philip,  he  clung  to  his  alliance  with  Venice  as  a  bulwark 
against  the  East.  He  sustained  the  friendship  with  Florence 
which  Pius  V.  had  made.  Fortified  by  these  two  powerful 
aUies,  he  took  up  the  causes  of  smaller  Italian  States ;  at  the 
risk  of  offending  France,  he  supported  the  Duke  of  Savoy  in  his 
seizure  of  Saluzzo.    In  the  Papal  States  he  embarked  on  admirable 


340  A  SHOKT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

improvement  schemes.  He  undertook  the  irrigation  of  the 
marshes  at  great  expense,  and  he  planted  mulberry  trees  for  the 
encouragement  of  the  silk  industry.  He  opened  out  the  port  of 
Ancona,  and  he  built  galleys  to  protect  the  Mediterranean  coast. 
Under  Sixtus  modern  Rome  began  to  look  like  itself.  He  laid 
out  the  upper  part  of  the  city,  and  joined  it  to  the  lower.  He 
gave  it  an  improved  water  supply  by  restoring  the  aqueducts. 
He  added  the  dome  to  St.  Peter's,  as  a  fitting  symbol  of  the 
glory  of  the  restored  Papacy,  and  he  set  up  the  obelisk  in  the 
Piazza  as  a  tribute  to  the  triumph  of  Christendom  over  Pagan- 
ism. He  reformed  the  constitution  of  the  Curia  by  the  intro- 
duction of  the  "Congregation"  system,  by  which  he  divided  the 
Cardinals  into  committees  for  dealing  with  special  purposes, 
such  as  the  Inquisition,  the  Segnatura,  and  the  Vatican  press. 
He  fixed  the  number  of  the  Cardinals  at  seventy,  and  he  was 
careful  in  his  choice  of  candidates. 

Sixtus  was  the  first  Pope  who  failed  to  appreciate  the  Jesuits. 
Like  Philip,  he  found  his  own  prerogative  menaced  by  a  corpora- 
tion which  was  in  itself  so  autocratic.  For  the  first  time  we  find 
the  mechanical  obedience  of  the  Jesuits  indicated  as  a  source 
of  danger  to  society.  Sixtus  wanted  to  reform  their  constitu- 
tion, and  Cardinal  Caraff"a  was  appointed  to  conduct  the  pre- 
liminaries. But  Caraff'a  was  the  friend  of  the  Order,  and  nothing 
definite  was  done  before  the  Pope's  death.  The  Jesuits  have 
been  accused  of  saying  and  thinking  many  things  which  the 
average  criminal  would  disavow.  Their  influence  has  been  de- 
tected in  crimes  of  the  period  with  which  they  had  nothing  to  do, 
and  their  more  dangerous  doctrines  have  been  misstated  in  con- 
nection with  events  for  which  they  were  in  no  way  responsible. 
But  it  is  certainly  true  that  so  great  an  influence  as  theirs  could 
hardly  have  been  used  without  abuse,  and  that  in  the  time  of 
Sixtus,  Jesuit  politics  were  of  a  subterranean  and  explosive 
character.  In  an  age  which  was  permeated  by  the  theory  of  the 
Divine  Right  of  Kings,  the  Jesuits  were  inclined  to  preach  the 
sovereignty  of  the  people.  They  found  that  strong  monarchies 
were  inherently  anti-papal,  and  in  the  attempt  to  exalt  the  Pope 
they  were  prepared  to  lower  the  standards  of  monarchy.  Their 
own  difl'erences  with  Philip  II.  were  an  added  impulse  in  this 
direction.  Mariana's  famous  book,  in  which  he  defends  the 
madman  who  assassinated  Henry  III.,  caused  a  good  deal  of 
discussion,  and  the  Jesuits  were  afterwards  accused,  on  its 
account,  of  favouring  tyrannicide.  At  the  time,  however, 
Mariana's  views  were  sanctioned  by  the  Sorbonne  and  supported 
by  the  legate.     Even  Philip  found  it  convenient  at  the  moment 


THE  COUNTEK-KEFORMATION  341 

to  accept  them,  for,  as  a  good  Catholic,  it  was  to  his  advantage 
to  do  so.  Sixtus  himself  was  much  more  in  sympathy  with  the 
rival  theory  held  by  the  national  party  in  France,  who  wanted 
a  strong  King,  a  united  France,  and  the  exclusion  of  Spanish 
influence.  The  Catholics  of  this  party  only  waited  for  Henry 
IV.  to  become  a  Catholic,  which  the  Politiques  were  not  slow  to 
arrange,  and  the  result  was  that  the  accession  of  Henry  led  di- 
rectly to  a  persecution  of  the  Jesuits. 

The  death  of  Sixtus,  in  1590,  was  welcomed  by  the  Romans 
in  spite  of  the  benefits  which  he  had  bestowed  on  them,  for 
Rome  was  still  Rome,  and  it  never  could  forgive  the  ruler  who 
gave  it  order.  There  is  a  completeness  about  his  pontificate 
which  is  rare  in  the  annals  of  the  Papacy ;  and  it  was  due,  it 
seems,  more  to  his  powers  of  direction  than  to  his  creative  facul- 
ties. The  three  Popes  who  succeeded  him  died  before  they  left 
their  mark  on  the  world.  Urban  VII.  reigned  only  twelve  days. 
Gregory  XIV.  was  an  ethereal  character  who  was  too  simple 
and  sincere  to  fathom  the  intrigues  of  the  Curia.  During  his 
ten  months'  pontificate  he  carried  on  a  direct  and  eff'ective 
policy  in  support  of  the  League.  He  and  his  successor,  Innocent 
IX.,  were  elected  from  among  a  selection  of  Cardinals  to  whom 
Philip  11.  had  pledged  his  support.  With  the  accession  of 
Clement  VIII.  (1592-1605)  another  decisive  epoch  begins. 

Clement  VIII.  was  the  youngest  of  four  excellent  middle- 
class  brothers  called  Aldobrandini,  and  he  had  all  the  energy 
and  resource  of  a  man  who  had  had  his  way  to  make  in  the 
world.  Sixtus  V.  had  been  drawn  to  him  by  his  talents  and  his 
piety,  and  had  made  him  a  Cardinal.  As  Pope,  he  was  dis- 
tinguished, in  an  age  of  high  standards,  for  his  exemplary  life. 
Every  day  he  confessed  himself,  and  every  day  he  shared  his 
simple  dinner  with  twelve  poor  men.  The  first  problem  which 
confronted  him  was  the  French  succession  question.  He  had 
meant  to  conciliate  both  parties  while  he  awaited  developments, 
but  he  found  himself  pledged  by  his  legate  to  the  Catholic 
League  party.  It  was  not  until  July,  1593,  that  Henry  IV. 
decided  that  "  Paris  vaut  bien  une  messe,"  and  seized  an 
absolution  with  a  crown  from  the  Catholics  in  France.  Clement's 
formal  act  of  absolution  two  years  later,  in  front  of  St.  Peter's, 
was  the  recognition  of  a  fait  accompli.  It  meant  for  the 
Papacy  the  freedom  from  Spanish  control  for  which  so  many 
Popes  had  waited.  France  had  at  last  put  itself  into  the 
hands  of  the  strong  Bourbon  King  who  knew  how  to  heal  her 
wounds,  and  who  could  face  the  Ilapsburgs  again  in  the 
might  which  the  Valois   had  lost.      Once  more  the  Pyrenees 


342  A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

would  hold  the  balance  which  the  Popes  had  so  long  struggled 
to  restore. 

The  question  of  Ferrara  gave  Henry  IV.  an  opportunity  to 
prove  his  untried  loyalty  to  the  Papacy  at  the  expense  of  the 
traditional  friendship  between  France  and  the  House  of  Este. 
Troubles  had  been  looming  in  Ferrara  ever  since  it  became  clear 
that  Duke  Alfonso  II.  would  die  without  an  heir.  As  a  fief  of 
the  Church  it  would  escheat  to  the  Pope,  and  Pius  V.  had  made 
this  inevitable  by  a  Bull  in  which  he  made  it  illegal  for  a  Pope 
to  grant  reinvestment  in  cases  of  probable  escheat.  Alfonso  II. 
had  secretly  left  his  duchy  to  his  kinsman  Cesare,  who  promptly 
took  possession  when  he  died  in  1597.  The  situation  was  very 
complicated  because  the  jealousy  of  Alfonso  had  kept  Cesare  a 
stranger  to  the  court  during  his  lifetime,  and  the  Este  traditions 
were  associated  with  Alfonso's  brilliant  sister  Lucrezia,  of  whom 
Ferrara  was  justly  proud.  Lucrezia  hated  the  unfortunate  heir, 
and  conspired  against  him  with  Clement's  nephew,  Cardinal 
Aldobrandini,  to  whom  she  left  all  that  was  hers  to  leave  of 
the  Este  heritage.  The  Italian  States  supported  Cesare  and  his 
rights  against  the  Pope,  but  they  were  not  prepared  to  fight  for 
him,  and  Henry  IV.,  to  whom  he  appealed,  was  at  the  moment 
too  new  a  Catholic  to  venture  to  oppose  Clement.  Henry  had 
his  reward,  for  Clement  called  him  a  second  Charlemagne,  and 
the  Pope's  support  was  necessary  to  him  in  his  struggle  with 
Philip.  But  the  fortunes  of  Ferrara  were  betrayed  into  the 
hands  of  the  Pope,  and  the  court  of  Ferrara,  which  had  been 
the  glory  of  Italy  and  the  pride  of  Tasso,  sank  into  oblivion  at 
Modena,  to  which  it  was  transferred.  Clement's  excommunica- 
tion brought  Cesare  to  his  feet,  and  Ferrara  became  a  papal  city 
with  a  strong  new  fortress  on  the  site  of  the  Este  palace. 

A  schism  in  the  Jesuit  camp  brought  the  Order  into  greater 
prominence  than  ever  in  the  early  days  of  Clement  VIII.  The 
young  Neapolitan,  General  Aquaviva,  of  whom  it  was  said  that 
"  one  must  love  him  if  one  only  looks  at  him,"  had  come  into 
opposition  with  the  Spanish  branch  of  the  Order.  Clement 
ordered  a  General  Congregation,  and  Aquaviva  was  triumphantly 
vindicated,  but  the  opposition  was  taken  up  by  Philip  II.  and 
by  the  Dominicans,  and  a  new  phase  of  the  free-will  controversy 
was  the  outcome.  Aquaviva  and  his  party  had  stood  for  a 
wider  "  Rule  of  Studies  "  and  a  freer  field  of  theological  discus- 
sion than  the  Spanish  party  were  willing  to  concede.  Some 
critical  comments  by  the  Jesuit  theologian  Molina  on  the 
theology  of  St.  Thomas  Aquinas  called  forth  the  Dominican 
counterblast.     As  the  theory  of  the  sovereignty  of  the  people 


THE  COUNTEK-REFORMATION  343 

had  got  the  Jesuits  into  trouble  in  France,  so  their  liberal 
theology  brought  them  opposition  in  Spain.  It  was  a  curious 
and  significant  phase  in  Jesuit  history  that,  while  tliey  were 
being  driven  out  of  France  for  their  Spanish  sympathies,  they 
were  being  attacked  by  the  monarchical  party  in  Spain.  The 
explanation  lies  in  the  fact  that  they  were  better  Churchmen 
than  politicians,  or,  as  Macaulay  puts  it,  "  Inflexible  in  nothing 
but  in  their  fidelity  to  the  Church,  they  were  equally  ready  to 
appeal  in  her  cause  to  the  spirit  of  loyalty  and  to  the  spirit  of 
freedom ".  Clement,  who  had  listened  to  the  opposition  in 
Spain,  supported  the  Jesuits  in  France.  Henry  IV.  made  his 
peace  with  them,  recalled  them  in  1600,  and  took  the  Jesuit 
Cotton  for  his  confessor.  The  influence  of  Clement  was  just 
then  at  its  height.  In  1593  he  had  healed  the  breach  between 
France  and  Spain  by  arranging  the  peace  of  Vervins.  The 
balance  was  now  so  true  that  there  was  no  need  to  rock  the 
scales. 

The  last  phase  of  Clement's  policy  was  marked  by  the  rivalry 
between  Cardinal  Farnese,  who  was  leader  of  the  opposition  in 
the  Spanish  interest,  and  Cardinal  Aldobrandini,  Clement's  tal- 
ented nephew,  who  was  the  guardian  of  the  French  alliance. 
Clement  had  not  carried  on  the  "constitutional"  government  of 
Sixtus  by  means  of  the  Congregations.  He  preferred  a  more 
autocratic  method,  and  as  long  as  he  ruled  in  person  all  went 
well.  But  the  growing  influence  of  the  Cardinal-nephew  brought 
a  revival  of  French  intervention  in  Italian  afi'airs  and  the  con- 
sequent hostility  of  the  Spanish  circle.  The  administrative 
aspect  of  Clement's  pontificate  has  been  made  notorious  by  two 
of  the  world's  causes  celebres — the  execution  of  Beatrice  ,Cenci 
and  the  burning  of  the  scientist  Bruno.  The  cause  of  Beatrice, 
as  Shelley  pleads  it,  rests  on  the  provocation  for  her  crime, 
which  seems  to  have  been  beyond  dispute.  The  case  against 
the  Papacy  is  the  alleged  profit  which  it  derived  from  her 
father's  evil  deeds.  It  is  to  be  feared  that  miscarriages  of  moral 
justice  stain  the  records  of  papal  history  no  less  than  those  of 
contemporary  England  or  France.  The  victims,  of  whom  Beatrice 
and  Pompilia  are  the  poetic  types,  paid  the  price  of  the  crude 
judicial  theory  which  held  it  to  be  more  important  to  punish 
evil  than  to  do  justice  to  the  evildoer.  The  death  of  Bruno 
belongs  to  another  ethical  category.  It  is  true  that  he  died  as 
a  martyr  to  scientific  truth,  but  he  had  not  lived  in  a  manner 
worthy  of  his  mission,  and  there  was  some  justification  for  his 
condemnation  by  the  Inquisition  as  an  example  of  the  evil 
moral  efi"ects  of  ■'  heresy  ". 


344  A  SHOET  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

By  the  death  of  Clement  VHI.  the  triumph  of  the  Counter- 
Reformation  was  established.  When  historians  have  set  forth 
the  causes  of  the  victory  and  traced  the  steps  by  which  it  was 
achieved,  the  recovering  power  of  Catholicism  remains  to 
astonish  the  world.  It  is  true  that  the  Protestant  princes  were 
often  degenerate,  like  Henry  IV.,  or  half-hearted,  like  Elizabeth. 
It  is  also  true  that  the  "  local  militia  "  of  Protestantism  was  no 
match  for  the  trained  "  foreign  service  army  "  of  the  Jesuits. 
But  Catholicism  had  at  least  as  great  an  advantage  in  the 
personal  character  of  the  Counter- Reformation  Popes.  Politics 
more  often  reflect  the  worst  than  the  best  of  the  men  who  make 
them,  and  it  is  not  easy  to  give  personal  holiness  its  due  on  the 
crowded  historical  canvas  of  the  sixteenth  century  Papacy. 
But  the  closer  we  look  into  the  lives  of  the  men  who  led  the 
Catholic  faith  to  victory,  the  more  profoundly  we  give  them 
our  homage.  History  cannot  linger  in  the  byways  of  biography, 
but  the  story  of  the  great  recovery  of  Catholicism  is  written 
more  clearly  than  elsewhere  in  the  zeal  of  Paul  IV.,  the  good 
deeds  of  Pius  V.  and  Clement  VIII.,  and  the  moral  energy  of 
Sixtus  V. 


CHAPTER  XXVIII 
THE  SKVENTEENTH  CENTURY 

MACAULAY  ascribes  the  success  of  the  Catholics  chiefly 
to  the  faculty  possessed  by  Catholicism  of  using  and 
directing  enthusiasm.  The  supreme  instance  of  this 
is  the  work  of  the  Jesuits  in  reclaiming  Germany.  They  were 
led  and  supported  by  Catholic  princes  whom  they  had  taught 
and  filled  with  the  divine  fire.  Since  1587  Sigismund  III.  had 
restored  Poland  to  Catholicism,  armed  with  the  weapon  of  royal 
patronage,  and  strengthened  with  papal  subsidies.  He  might 
have  been  King  of  Denmark  if  he  had  been  a  less  uncom- 
promising Catholic.  Meanwhile,  the  Jesuit  colleges  turned 
Poland  into  a  nursery  garden  of  the  Catholic  faith  in  which 
strong  young  plants  were  nurtured  for  the  neighbouring  German 
States.  In  Germany  proper  the  ecclesiastical  princes  led  the 
way  to  restoration  by  banishing  the  Protestants  from  their 
territories,  as  they  claimed  to  be  allowed  to  do  by  the  Religious 
Peace.  In  1597  Ferdinand  II.  took  a  solemn  oath  before  tlie 
shrine  of  Loretto  to  root  out  the  Protestants  from  his  duchies  of 
Styria,  Carinthia  and  Carniola.  His  cousin,  the  Emperor  Rudolf 
II.,  followed  his  example  in  Austria  and  Bohemia.  Maximilian 
of  Bavaria,  with  the  help  of  the  great  Jesuit  College  at  Ingolstadt, 
played  the  part  of  "  a  fervent  missionary  wielding  the  powers  of 
a  prince  ".  With  France  in  the  strong  hands  of  Henry  IV.,  whose 
religion  was  his  policy,  and  Spain,  Catholic  as  ever,  under  Philip 
III.,  but  humbled  a  little  by  the  triumph  of  the  Jesuits,  Paul  V. 
(1605-1621)  might  be  expected  to  pitch  his  prerogatives  high. 

Paul's  pretensions  were  inclined  to  exceed  his  grasp,  and  a 
series  of  successful  disputes  at  the  beginning  of  his  reign  had  not 
taught  him  to  discard  his  narrow  and  pedantic  autocracy.  He 
had  got  the  better  of  the  Neapolitan  government  in  a  judicial 
dispute,  of  the  Knights  of  Malta  and  of  Savoy  in  investiture 
quarrels,  and  of  Lucca  and  Genoa  on  questions  of  ecclesiastical 
rights.  A  struggle  with  Venice  taught  him  to  walk  more  warily. 
There  was  a  strong  party  growing  up  in  Venice — the  oldest  and 
proudest  of  city  States — which,  under  the  leadership  of  Sarpi,  set 

345 


346  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

itself  to  oppose  the  new  trend  of  Catholic  opinion,  and  especially 
the  revived  power  of  the  Pope,  as  it  was  taught  and  enforced  by 
the  Jesuits.  Venice  had  several  grievances  against  the  Papacy, 
and  Paul's  attempt  to  claim  judicial  rights  over  two' priests  was 
made  a  test  case.  In  a  rash  moment  Paul  excommunicated  the 
Signoria,  and  threatened  the  city  with  the  Interdict.  Venice 
remained  coolly  indifferent,  and  retorted  by  expelling  the  Jesuits. 
The  Pope  appealed  to  Spain,  and  Venice  to  France,  and  the  affair 
ended  in  a  compromise,  which  in  relation  to  his  claims  amounted 
to  a  papal  defeat.  The  priests  were  handed  over  to  Paul,  and 
Venice  was  absolved  in  secret,  but  the  city  had  safeguarded  its 
pride  throughout,  and  refused  to  receive  back  the  Jesuits  or  to 
repeal  the  laws  which  had  caused  offence.  The  sting  lay  in  the 
fact  that  Venice  had  successfully  braved  the  Interdict,  which  was 
never  again  used. 

Europe  was  moving  steadily  on  towards  the  Thirty  Years' 
War,  which  was  "  the  last  of  the  Crusades ".  As  far  as  the 
trouble  was  religious,  it  turned  on  points  which  were  left  over 
from  the  Religious  Peace  of  1555.  The  Protestants  were  obliged 
to  make  a  stand  against  the  aggressive  policy  of  the  Catholics, 
who  interpreted  all  the  disputed  clauses  of  the  Peace  in  their 
own  favour.  But  the  condition  of  Protestantism  was  very  unlike 
that  of  the  Catholic  world,  for  while  "  the  whole  zeal  of  the 
Catholics  was  directed  against  the  Protestants,  almost  the  whole 
zeal  of  the  Protestants  was  directed  against  each  other  "  (Mac- 
aulay).  Lutheranism  alone  had  any  status  in  Germany,  and  no 
Lutheran  had  any  desire  to  struggle  for  toleration  for  a  Calvinist. 
The  Protestant  union  of  1608,  which  Christian  of  Anhalt  organ- 
ised under  the  leadership  of  the  Elector  Frederick,  was  a  con- 
federacy formed  by  the  Calvinists  in  self-defence,  and  the 
Lutheran  princes  held  aloof  from  it.  On  the  other  hand, 
Maximilian  of  Bavaria's  Catholic  League  of  1609  had  behind  it 
the  full  force  of  the  Catholic  reaction.  Maximilian  devoted  to  it 
his  wonderful  powers  of  leadership  and  his  large  resources  ;  he 
also  gave  it  a  brilliant  Catholic  general  in  the  Belgian  Tilly.  The 
Emperor  and  Ferdinand  of  Styria  joined  it,  and  Paul  V.  gave  it 
his  keenest  support.  Philip  III.  did  it  good  service  by  keeping 
James  I.  of  England  out  of  the  struggle  as  long  as  possible  by 
the  bait  of  the  Spanish  match.  Rudolf's  troubles  in  Austria  and 
Bohemia,  and  the  revolt  of  Cleres,  gave  the  Protestants  a  good 
start,  but  when  Ferdinand  II.  came  into  his  own  in  1617  as  ruler 
of  all  the  Hapsburg  territories  and  Emperor-elect,  the  Catholic 
cause  was  certain  to  go  forward.  The  revolt  of  Bohemia  was  the 
outcome  of  his  militant  Catholicism  ;  it  formed  the  prelude  of 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY  347 

"the  most  desolating  of  modern  wars"  (1618-1648).  Paul  V. 
did  his  best  to  follow  the  gleam  of  religion  among  the  storm- 
clouds  of  conflicting  policies.  The  battle  of  the  White  Mountain, 
which  gave  Boliemia  to  Catholicism  and  to  Ferdinand,  was  a 
Catholic  even  more  than  a  Hapsburg  victory,  after  which  the 
'•  Winter  King"  Frederick  melted  away  as  the  Jesuits  had  fore- 
told. Paul  was  fortunate  enough  to  die  at  the  full  tide  of  Catho- 
lic success,  surrounded  in  Rome  by  the  streets  and  squares  and 
gardens  which  he  had  planned  on  the  massive  and  grandiose 
scale  which  was  the  mirror  of  his  mind.  His  greatest  pride  was 
the  pretentious  but  effective  fagade  of  St.  Peter's  which  filled  his 
contemporaries  with  joy,  and  seemed  to  the  seventeenth  century 
esthetes  an  improvement  on  the  designs  of  Bramante  and 
Michelangelo. 

Paul's  successor  was  Gregory  XV.— an  old  and  delicate  man, 
who  left  the  government  chiefly  in  the  hands  of  his  energetic  young 
nephew,  Ludovico  Ludovisio.  His  pontificate  saw  the  continued 
success  of  the  Catholic  League  in  Austria  and  the  Empire,  and 
the  energetic  reclamation  of  Bohemia  by  the  Jesuits  under 
Carlo  Caraffa.  In  1623  the  Palatine  electorate  was  given  to 
Maximilian  of  Bavaria,  whose  arms  had  wrested  it  from 
Frederick.  This  gave  the  Catholics  a  majority  of  five  to  two 
among  the  electors,  which  was  a  sign  of  the  times.  In  France 
a  steady  decline  of  Protestantism  had  set  in,  as  a  result  of 
internal  dissension,  co-operating  with  the  vigorous  policy  of 
Richelieu  which  was  beginning  to  make  itself  felt.  On  the 
whole  the  person  who  had  least  cause  to  rejoice  in  the  Catholic 
successes  was  the  man  who  had  sacrificed  most  to  bring  them 
about.  "Ferdinand  II.'s  aUies  served  him  so  well  that  they 
threw  him  into  the  shade"  (Acton).  Tilly's  successes  were  the 
successes  of  Bavaria,  and  Maximilian  was  becoming  a  dangerous 
friend.  So  Ferdinand  hired  a  general  of  his  own,  and  commis- 
sioned Wallenstein  to  make  the  Austrian  army. 

Meanwhile  the  Hapsburg  fortunes  in  Italy  had  brought  them 
up  against  their  Bourbon  rivals.  In  order  to  establish  communi- 
cations between  Spanish  Milan  and  Austrian  Switzerland,  Philip 
took  possession  of  the  Alpine  passes  in  the  Valtelline.  This 
was  regarded  as  an  act  of  aggression  by  their  neighbours,  who 
appealed  to  their  natural  protector,  France.  Both  sides  referred 
the  matter  to  the  Pope,  and  asked  him  to  garrison  the  Alpine 
fortresses  with  his  own  troops  while  the  question  was  being 
decided.  After  some  hesitation,  Gregory  accepted  the  dangerous 
compHment,  and  the  independence  of  Vahelline  was  admitted 
by  every  one.     At  that  point  Gregory  died.    His  successor.  Urban 


348  A  SHOET  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

VIIT.,  was  not  trusted  as  his  predecessor  had  been.  The  papal 
garrison  gradually  became  Spanish ;  it  was  fed  from  Milan  and 
paid  by  Spain.  In  1624,  France  and  Venice  drove.it  out  of  the 
fortresses,  and  restored  them  to  the  Grisons  peasants  of  the 
valleys  below.  Urban  shrank  back  into  neutrality,  and  in 
1626  arranged  the  peace  of  Monzon,  which  gave  the  Valtelline 
nominally  to  the  Grisons  and  virtually  to  Spain.  France,  who  had 
her  own  ends  to  serve,  was  prevailed  upon  by  Urban  to  begin 
her  career  of  selfishness  by  the  sacrifice  of  the  small  allies  who 
had  trusted  her.  Urban  played  into  the  hands  of  Richelieu, 
who  wanted  peace  with  Spain  in  order  to  deal  with  the  Huguenots, 
and  so  sacrificed  Italy  to  the  ambition  of  France. 

Urban  VIII.  (1623-1644)  had  risen  by  his  wits  as  Matteo 
Barberini,  and  made  his  name  on  a  successful  embassy  to 
France.  He  was  elected  by  French  influence,  and  he  never 
forgot  that  he  was  Pope  in  the  interests  of  France.  Nor  did  he 
allow  France  to  forget  it,  as  the  affairs  of  Mantua  were  soon  to 
show.  The  heir  of  Mantua  was  a  Frenchman,  Charles,  Due  de 
Nevers-Rethel,  but  he  had  a  possible  rival  in  a  German  girl 
who  belonged  to  the  house  of  Hapsburg.  Urban,  who  was 
radically  anti -Hapsburg,  connived  at  a  secret  marriage  between 
the  rivals,  gave  Charles  a  dispensation  in  order  to  make  it  legal, 
and  appealed  to  France  to  support  his  action  against  the  inevit- 
able opposition  of  Spain  and  Austria.  Richelieu  was  preoccupied 
at  that  moment  against  the  Huguenots,  but  after  the  siege  of 
Rochelle  Louis  XIII.  came  readily  enough  into  the  fray.  The 
humiliation  of  Ferdinand  II.  was  the  next  move  in  Richelieu's 
game  for  the  aggrandisement  of  France.  But  the  afi'air  of 
Mantua  only  showed  how  strong  Ferdinand  had  grown  since  the 
White  Mountain.  A  French  success  against  the  Spanish  forces 
besieging  Casale  was  more  than  redeemed  by  Wallenstein's 
victory  against  Mantua  itself.  Ferdinand  had  declared  that  he 
meant  "  to  show  the  Italians  that  there  is  still  an  Emperor,  and 
that  he  will  call  them  to  account".  By  1630,  Wallenstein  was 
master  of  Mantua,  Venice  was  trembling  at  his  approach, 
and  Rome  anticipated  another  sack.  Ferdinand  wanted  to  be 
crowned  at  Bologna,  but  Urban  made  excuses  and  looked 
confidently  to  the  designs  of  Richelieu  to  deliver  him. 

In  1629,  a  split  in  the  Catholic  camp  made  it  possible  for 
Richelieu  to  weave  the  web  round  Ferdinand  which  was  to  be 
his  ruin.  Maximilian  of  Bavaria  placed  himself  at  the  head  of 
a  party  in  opposition  to  the  so-called  military  tyranny  of  Wallen- 
stein. The  action  of  the  Jesuits  in  taking  over  the  monastic 
property  which  was  recovered  from  the  Protestants  aggravated 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY  349 

the  antagonism,  and  at  the  Diet  of  Ratislion  in  1630  it  was 
expressed  in  the  refusal  of  the  Catholic  princes  to  sanction  the 
election  of  Ferdinand's  son  as  King  of  tlie  Romans.  Ferdinand 
fell  into  the  trap.  He  sacrificed  Wallenstein,  and  with  W'allen- 
stein  all  that  he  had  gained  in  Italy.  At  that  moment  a  new 
and  more  formidable  champion  of  Protestantism  came  victorious 
into  Germany.  The  successes  of  Gustavus  Adolphus  of  Sweden 
brought  him  at  last  to  the  Italian  border,  and  his  death  in  1632 
saved  Urban  from  tlie  worst  dilemma  of  his  life.  Behind 
Gustavus  Adolphus  were  the  schemes  of  Richelieu,  wlio — 
Catholic  and  Cardinal  as  he  was — did  not  scruple  to  enlist 
Protestantism  in  the  cause  of  France.  Behind  Richelieu, 
screened  by  false  goodwill  to  Ferdinand  and  infinitesimal 
subsidies  to  the  Catholic  arms,  Urban  VIII.  concealed  his  an- 
tipathy to  the  most  diligent  of  Catholics,  and  pulled  the  wires 
which  were  working  the  downfall  of  the  Papacy. 

After  the  death  of  Gustavus  Adolphus.  the  last  phase  of  the 
Thirty  Years'  War,  and  the  definite  intervention  of  France, 
abstracted  the  religious  element  out  of  the  struggle,  and  gave 
Urban  a  plausible  pretext  for  neutrality.  In  the  quarrels  of  one 
Catholic  power  against  another — the  dynastic  rivalries  of  Haps- 
burg  against  Bovirbon — the  Pope  could  claim  that  lie  had  no 
concern.  As  long  as  Ferdinand  was  facing  the  consequences  of 
the  Edict  of  Restitution,  which  his  Catholic  zeal  had  dictated, 
and  as  long  as  the  opposition  was  headed  by  the  chief  of  heretics, 
it  was  necessary  for  Urban  to  act  the  part  of  head  of  Catholicism. 
After  his  sorrowful  '•  Te  Deum"  for  the  Imperial  victory  of 
Nordlingen  in  1634,  he  gave  up  the  pretence,  and  filled  with 
bitterness  the  Catholic  soul  of  Ferdinand.  The  price  which  the 
Papacy  paid  for  the  neutrality  of  Urban  came  to  light  at  the 
Peace  of  Westphalia.  The  Catholic  assembly  at  Miinster,  which 
discussed  the  preliminaries  of  peace,  paid  no  attention  to  the 
demands  of  the  Pope,  and  the  legate,  Chigi,  who  presided,  could 
only  influence  it  by  obstruction.  The  real  maker  of  the  peace 
was  Christina  of  Sweden — at  that  time  the  most  modern  of 
Protestant  queens,  and  later  the  most  broad-minded  of 
Catholic  converts.  She  presided  over  the  Protestant  assembly 
which  framed  the  peace  almost  as  it  was  adopted  by  both  sides 
at  Westphalia  in  1648.  In  politics,  the  peace  roughly  defined 
the  modern  map  of  Europe  ;  in  religion,  it  wisely  drew  the  line 
where  it  was  already  traced.  The  greatest  loser  was  the  Pope, 
not  only  tlurough  the  many  articles  which  were  unfavourable  to 
the  rights  of  the  Papacy,  but  still  more  through  the  loss  of  in- 
fluence which  was  never  regained. 


350  A  SHOKT  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

And  yet,  Urban,  who  had  lost  so  much,  claimed  to  be  a 
Hildebrand,  and  used  the  most  extravagant  language  about  his 
prerogatives.  His  disastrous  enterprise  against  Parma  was 
really  a  war  of  etiquette.  Odoardo  Farnese,  Duke  of  Parma, 
claimed  to  be  the  head  of  the  Italian  nobility,  and  supported  his 
claim  with  an  ostentatious  arrogance  which  offended  Urban's 
relations,  and  provoked  the  anger  of  Urban  himself.  The  Pope 
and  the  Barberini  opened  a  "  money  market  war  "  on  the  Farnesi 
by  buying  up  the  "  Monti  "  of  Parma,  which  they  had  previously 
cheapened  by  a  papal  warrant  forbidding  the  export  of  grain 
from  Parmese  Castro.  This  gave  an  economic  pretext  for  the 
seizure  of  Castro  by  papal  arms,  and  the  excommunication  of 
Odoardo.  The  three  neighbour  states  of  Middle  Italy  took  up 
the  cause  of  Parma,  and  the  "  Four  Dukes  " — Parma,  Tuscany, 
Modena,  and  Venice — made  an  entirely  successful  war  on  the 
Barberini.  By  negotiating  at  the  wrong  moment  the  Farnesi 
lost  a  chance  of  crushing  the  Pope,  and  the  peace  of  Venice  left 
things  as  they  were  before  the  war.  But  the  immense  expense 
of  the  campaign  crippled  the  papal  States  for  years  to  come. 
Nor  was  the  war  of  the  Barberini,  as  it  was  called,  the  only 
cause  of  economic  trouble.  Urban  was  the  most  extravagant 
of  Popes.  He  had  a  passion  for  building  expensive  and  unneces- 
sary fortifications,  some  of  which,  like  the  Bologna  Fort  Urbano, 
were  intended  rather  to  impress  the  countryside  than  to  defend 
it.  The  escheat  of  Urbino,  on  the  death  of  the  last  of  the  Delia 
Rovere,  was  a  new  source  of  revenue,  but  it  was  swallowed  up  in 
the  ocean  of  debt  which  accumulated  from  the  Monti.  Added 
to  this,  the  new  nepotism  was  as  large  a  financial  drain  as  the 
old.  Since  Bulls  now  prevented  the  alienation  of  Church  lands, 
the  relations  of  the  Popes  were  compensated  for  the  dignities 
which  might  once  have  been  theirs  by  a  convention  which 
allotted  to  them  the  sums  annually  left  over  from  the  papal 
revenue.  In  this  way  the  new  families  who  ruled  Rome  rose  to 
power  through  money.  The  Peretti,  the  Aldobrandini,  and  the 
Borghesi  were  all  parvenus  of  the  early  seventeenth  century,  and 
now  the  Barberini  joined  the  throng,  richest  and  most  influential 
of  all.  Urban  himself  was  shocked  when  he  discovered  how 
much  his  relations  cost  him,  and  in  1640  a  financial  inquiry  re- 
vealed the  extent  of  the  evil.  Before  he  died,  in  1644,  the  ex- 
haustion of  his  credit  led  him  to  make  the  inglorious  peace 
which  ended  the  disastrous  Castro  war. 

The  ideal  of  Urban  was  to  rule  as  a  temporal  prince  in  the 
interests  of  France.  It  was  not  the  ideal  of  the  Catholic  revival, 
with  which  he  had  little  in  common,  and  in  breaking  away  from 


THE  SEVENTEENTPI  CENTUllY  351 

it  he  brought  the  Papacy  to  an  end  as  a  European  power.  An 
amateur  soldier  and  a  minor  poet,  of  boundless  conceit  and  con- 
tradictory habit  of  mind,  Urlian  gives  the  impression  of  a  second- 
rate  personality  dealing  with  great  forces  which  he  can  neither 
appreciate  nor  control.  He  posed  literally  as  a  man  of  iron  :  he 
wished  to  have  a  statue  forged  in  iron  :  he  made  an  armoury  at 
Tivoli,  and  an  arsenal  in  the  Vatican  vaults.  He  covered  St. 
Angelo  with  an  iron  breastwork.  His  table  was  strewn  with 
military  plans  interspersed  with  books  of  modern  poetry.  In 
reality  he  was  a  shadow  man,  playing  with  the  toys  of  power. 
The  protest  of  his  successor  against  the  formal  publication  of 
the  Peace  of  Westphalia  announced  to  the  world  his  failure. 
For  the  Peace  put  the  clock  back  to  1624,  taking  the  first  year  of 
Urban's  pontificate  as  the  standard  measure  by  which  the  terri- 
tory  of  Europe  was  apportioned  to  the  two  religions.  It  is  true 
that  the  Peace  of  Westphalia  marked  the  triumph  of  Catholicism 
over  Protestantism,  and  that  it  left  the  Church  of  Rome  "  victori- 
ous and  dominant  in  France,  Belgium,  Bavaria,  Bohemia,  Austria, 
Poland,  and  Hungary  ".  But  the  victory  had  been  won  in  the 
fifty  years  before  Urban  VIII.  began  to  reign,  and  the  last  twenty 
years  had  been  years  of  stagnation  implying  decline. 

The  great  finale,  which  ends  the  Wars  of  Religion,  brings  us 
to  a  new  phase  in  the  history  of  the  Papacy  in  which  the  Popes 
are  at  war  with  movements  within  the  Catholic  borders.  The 
rise  of  the  Jansenists,  the  first  of  these,  was  a  legacy  from  the 
theological  disputes  of  the  Council  of  Trent.  Jansen  and  his 
friend,  Du  Verger,  two  students  of  Louvain,  adopted  the  strict 
Augustinian  view  of  the  doctrine  of  Grace,  as  opposed  to  the 
wide  Jesuit  theory  which  Bellarmine  had  formulated,  and  the 
Council  adopted.  Jansen,  as  Bishop  of  Ypres,  and  Du  Verger,  as 
Abbot  of  St.  CjTan,  gathered  round  them  a  group  of  disciples, 
among  whom  the  leaders  were  the  influential  Arnauld  family. 
The  holiness  of  St.  Cyran  made  him  a  power  in  Paris,  and  the 
social  circle  of  the  Arnaulds  widened  into  a  school  of  thought 
which  had  its  centre  at  Port  Royal.  Jansen's  book,  "  Augus- 
tinus,"  gave  it  a  formulated  creed,  and  St.  Cyran's  influence, 
which  his  imprisonment  by  Richelieu,  and  his  death  in  164.3, 
in  no  way  lessened,  created  a  spiritual  force.  They  worked  for 
the  inner  regeneration  of  Catholicism,  and  deprecated  the  em- 
phasis which  the  Jesuits  laid  on  outward  restoration.  The  deep- 
ening of  personal  religion,  the  freedom  of  the  will,  and  the  con- 
sciousness of  the  love  of  God,  were  the  sources  from  which  they 
drew.  ''S'humilier,  soufi'rir,  et  dependre  de  Dieu  est  toute  la 
vie  chr^tienne".     Le  Maitre,  the  first  orator  of  the  Parlement, 


352  A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

Arnauld  d'Andilly,  the  intimate  friend  of  Richelieu,  and  other 
men  of  influence,  joined  the  unmonastic  community  of  Port  Royal 
— half-spiritual,  half-literary,  and  wholly  devout — where  Racine 
developed  his  classical  perfection,  and  Pascal  unfolded  his  genius, 
in  the  atmosphere  of  mystical  Quiet,  which  afterwards  gave  them 
a  name.  The  powers  of  Angelique  Arnauld  enlisted  the  influence 
of  women,  and  her  brilliant  leadership  of  the  nuns  of  Port  Royal 
is  one  of  the  glories  of  Jansenism  and  of  France. 

There  was  nothing  Protestant  about  Jansenism,  except  what 
its  purity  and  zeal  had  in  common  with  the  earliest  leaders  of 
Protestantism  and  every  sincere  religious  movement.  Jansen 
protested  against  Richelieu's  Protestant  alliances,  and  the  mind 
of  Port  Royal,  as  it  is  expressed  in  its  publications,  is  utterly 
Catholic  and  loyal  to  tradition.  It  was  indeed  an  impulse  of 
loyalty  which  led  Port  Royal  to  refer  certain  doctrines,  held  by 
Jansen  in  spite  of  papal  condemnation,  to  Innocent  X.  Innocent 
was  not  a  theologian,  and  he  tried  to  avoid  dealing  with  an  un- 
congenial problem.  But  in  1653  he  was  persuaded  to  plunge 
in,  and  the  result  was  his  condemnation  of  the  Five  Propositions 
in  which  the  Jansenist  doctrines  were  summed  up.  The  man 
who  had  persuaded  him  to  do  it  became  Pope  himself  two  years 
later,  and  so  was  unfortunately  pledged  against  the  Jansenists, 
who  now  denied  that  the  Five  Propositions  were  Jansenist  at  all. 
When  Alexander  VII.  upheld  them  as  being  contained  in  Jan- 
sen's  book,  the  Jansenists  retaliated  by  denying  his  right  to  say 
so.  In  other  words,  they  denied  the  Pope's  authority  ex  cathe- 
dra to  determine  questions  of  fact.  Alexander  condemned  them 
again,  and  Louis  tried  to  enforce  their  submission  by  requiring 
them  to  sign  formularies  drawn  up  on  the  model  of  the  Bulls. 
But  the  Jansenists  had  become  a  party,  with  the  strength  and 
the  faults  of  a  political  organisation.  They  had  also,  against 
their  natural  inclination,  become  heretics,  with  the  courage,  the 
pertinacity,  and  something  of  the  self-righteousness  of  heresy  in 
their  attitude  to  their  opponents.  Pascal's  "  Provincial  Letters  " 
gained  for  Jansenism  "  a  sweeping  victory  of  human  wit "  against 
the  Jesuits.  The  system  of  casuistry  was  never  more  unfairly 
represented,  and  no  Jesuit  ever  combined  craft  and  stupidity  as 
ludicrously  as  Pascal's  imaginary  opponent,  but  the  "Provincial 
Letters "  did  their  work  with  a  deadly  effectiveness.  By  the 
time  that  outward  peace  was  patched  up  by  Clement  IX.  in  1668, 
a  large  section  of  the  Catholic  world  was  laughing  with  Pascal 
against  the  ill-formulated  Jesuit  theories  which  he  so  mercilessly 
ridiculed. 

Irony  tells  in  proportion  to  its  truth,  and  Pascal — partisan 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY  353 

and  puritan  as  he  wap — knew  that  he  was  not  fighting  in  the  air. 
Tlie  Jesuits  were  not  the  splendid  army  wliich  tliey  had  been, 
and  their  sway  was  not  undisputed.  Aquaviva'a  successors  had 
relaxed  the  discipline  which  held  them  together,  and,  in  1661, 
the  Superiors  of  the  Order  managed  to  change  the  constitution 
by  associating  a  Vicar  with  the  General,  who  limited  his  power 
and  brought  in  an  element  of  oligarchy.  The  blow  was  directed 
against  Goswin  Nickel,  an  unpopular  General,  who  had  combined 
misgovernment  with  discourtesy,  but  the  change  reacted  upon 
the  Order  by  its  tendency  to  check  reform.  There  were  two  chief 
ways  in  which  the  Jesuits  began  to  forfeit  their  empire  in  the 
seventeenth  century.  The  first  of  these  was  their  submission  to 
the  mercantile  spirit,  and  the  second,  their  misuse  of  the  most 
delicate  of  all  prerogatives,  the  direction  of  conscience.  Their 
shortcomings  in  both  directions  have  been  exaggerated,  and 
much  has  been  laid  to  their  charge  for  which  they  were  not  ex- 
clusively to  blame.  But  even  if  their  aims  have  been  misunder- 
stood and  their  failings  unfairly  caricatured,  the  Jesuits  must  be 
judged  by  their  own  high  standards,  and  by  these  they  cannot  be 
acquitted.  They  took  to  merchandise  at  first  as  earlier  Orders 
had  taken  to  agriculture.  But  the  first  abuses  came  in  when 
they  began  to  do  business  for  their  relations  as  unpaid  solicitors. 
At  the  same  time  they  began  to  bring  their  possessions  into  their 
Colleges  with  them,  and  to  accept  presents  from  rich  pupils. 
They  held  fairs  and  money-exchanges,  and  they  maintained  a 
cloth-market  at  Macerata  and  a  wine  trade  in  Portugal. 

Side  by  side  with  their  growing  commercialism,  their  spiritual 
administration  deteriorated.  Their  opponents  accused  them  of 
making  the  way  of  transgressors  easy,  and  the  burden  of  sinners 
light.  They  pointed  out  the  convenient  vagueness  of  the  theory 
of  Probabilism,  and  likened  its  upholders  to  doctors  who  put 
pillows  under  the  shoulders  of  sinners.  Their  defenders  denied 
that  the  system  of  casuistry  was  intended  as  a  code ;  it  was 
merely  an  attempt  to  classify  sins  in  a  way  which  the  Pope's 
penal  powers  made  necessary.  They  pointed  to  the  bold  atti- 
tude of  the  Jesuits  to  the  Grand  Monarque,  whom  they  "cha- 
grinait  tous  les  jours" — to  the  heroism  which  led  them  to 
martyrdom  in  China,  and  to  death  in  plague-stricken  Orleans. 
There  is  truth  in  both  points  of  view.  History  shows  that  the 
Jesuits  were  for  the  most  part  moral  and  devoted  in  their  lives ; 
many  of  them  were  brave  and  a  few  heroic.  Undoubtedly  they 
were  unfortunate  in  not  having  a  Pascal  in  their  ranks ;  they 
were  careless  and  unskilful  in  self-defence.  But  there  are  many 
instances  of  their  "  tortuous  aberrations  of  a  subtlety  subversive 

23 


354  A  SHOKT  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

of  all  morality"  (Ranke).  They  were  not  free  from  an  "obliging 
and  accommodating"  tendency  to  extend  their  authority  by 
softening  the  severity  of  evangelical  Christianity.  Bossuet,  a 
fairer  judge  than  Pascal,  called  them  in  1663  "  des  esprits  vaine- 
ment  subtil  .  .  .  des  astres  errants  .  .  ,  (qui)  confondent  le  ciel 
et  la  terre  and  melent  Jesus-Christ  avec  Bdlial". 

The  strength  of  Jansenism  and  the  deterioration  of  Jesuitism 
— dangerous  as  both  were  to  the  Papacy — were  less  menacing 
than  the  third  peril  of  the  age  which  was  personified  in  Louis 
XIV.,  "the  trial  and  terror  of  the  Holy  See,"  who  tried  to  cover 
his  jealousy  of  the  Pope  by  his  zeal  as  a  persecutor.  Ever  since 
Gerson  and  d'Ailly  had  struggled  for  the  claims  of  nationality  at 
the  Council  of  Constance,  there  had  always  been  a  "  Galilean 
party "  which  had  coloured  the  Church  in  France.  Francis  I. 
had  nearly  followed  his  rival  Henry  VIII.  in  his  separation  from 
Rome,  for  the  Valois,  like  the  Tudors,  recognised  the  inherent 
antagonism  between  absolutism  and  Catholicism,  which  was  the 
moral  of  the  Middle  Ages.  The  Valois,  as  we  have  noticed,  took 
no  interest  in  the  Council  of  Trent,  and  the  Tridentine  decrees 
were  never  confirmed  in  France.  Under  the  Bourbons,  the 
Galilean  tendency  was  still  more  strongly  marked.  Richelieu 
and  Mazarin  frequently  opposed  papal  policy,  the  Peace  of  West- 
phalia was  arranged  in  spite  of  the  Pope,  and  France  had  more 
than  once  made  and  unmade  the  Popes  of  the  seventeenth 
century.  And  yet  the  ascendancy  of  France  had  its  glories  for 
Catholicism.  The  great  Catholic  heroes  of  the  seventeenth 
century  are  Frenchmen,  and  its  saints  are  the  saints  of  France. 
Port  Royal  alone,  out  of  favour  no  less  with  the  Court  than  with 
the  Curia,  contributes  its  severe  melancholy  to  the  beauty  of  the 
picture.  If  it  was  true  of  the  doctrines  of  Jansenism  that  "  elles 
y  otent  de  la  religion  ce  qui  nous  console ;  elles  y  mettent  la 
crainte  la  douleur,  la  desespoir " — France  gave  back  to  Catholi- 
cism in  St.  Francis  de  Sales  the  tenderness  and  warmth  which 
Port  Royal  had  taken  away.  While  St.  Francis  taught  men  and 
women  to  "pray  by  labours  of  love,"  St.  Vincent  de  Paul,  himself 
a  peasant,  became  "the  great  missionary  of  the  common  people  ". 
The  new  Order  of  Ursuline  nuns  took  the  young  girls  of  France 
into  its  care,  while  St.  Maur  provided  a  Catholic  education  for 
the  boys  of  the  noblesse. 

Against  this  we  have  to  set  the  picture  of  conventional 
religion  as  it  prevailed  at  the  court  of  Louis  XIV.  A  better  wit 
than  Louis  made  him  say  "L'dtat  c'est  moi,"  but  if  he  had  said 
it,  he  would  certainly  have  included  religion  within  the  scope  of 
the  epigram.     What  is  more,  the  French  clergy,  with  Bossuet  at 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY  356 

their  head,  would  have  agreed  with  him.  They  condemned  Port 
Royal  less  for  its  heresies  than  for  its  failure  to  regard  Louis  as  a 
second  Pope.  They  supported  Louis  in  his  persecution  of  the 
Huguenots,  which  culminated  in  the  Revocation  of  the  Edict  of 
Nantes  in  1685,  because  freedom  of  conscience,  as  far  as  the 
Edict  admitted  it,  was  inconsistent  with  passive  obedience  to 
the  Crown.  The  influence  of  Madame  de  Maintenon,  before  and 
after  her  marriage  with  the  King,  and  her  obvious  good  sense 
and  high  principle,  established  religion  as  a  fashion  at  the 
inconsistent  court  of  the  Grand  Monarque.  It  was  an  easy  kind 
of  religion,  with  which  the  man  of  the  world,  with  the  help  of 
the  Jesuits,  could  keep  pace.  The  motto  of  it  was,  "  II  faut 
s'accommoder  c\  I'humanitd"  (D'Aubigny),  and  its  justification  is 
expressed  by  St.  Evremond — "  Ceux  qui  n'ont  pas  assez  de 
consideration  pour  I'autre  vie  sont  conduits  au  salut  par  les 
^gards  et  les  devoirs  de-celle-ci ".  The  religion  of  the  Court  of 
Versailles,  supj>orted  by  the  Jesuits,  opposed  by  the  Jansenists, 
and  upheld  by  the  national  pride  of  the  Gallican  clergy,  was 
foredoomed  to  opposition  from  the  religion  of  Rome.  It  is 
characteristic  of  the  new  era,  which  begins  with  the  close  of  the 
Wars  of  Religion,  that  the  movements  in  France  are  more 
important  to  the  Papacy  than  the  policy  of  the  Popes.  Innocent 
X.  (1644-1655)  brought  the  court  of  Rome  into  disrepute  by  his 
domestic  troubles,  and  the  financial  corruption  which  was  the 
result  of  them.  He  was  ruled  entirely  by  his  rich  sister-in-law, 
Donna  Olimpia  Maidalchino,  whose  quarrels  with  her  step- 
daughter and  other  rivals  grew  into  Curial  faction-fights.  Rumour, 
of  course,  alloted  to  Olimpia  a  more  interesting  and  scandalous 
connection  with  the  Pope  than  that  of  domestic  tyrant.  But  the 
truth  seems  to  have  been  that  she  had  financed  him  in  his  youth, 
as  the  rich  woman  of  the  family,  and  that,  finding  him  a  successful 
investment,  she  meant  to 'share  the  profits.  He  was  elected  as 
a  harmless  nonentity,  because  "  il  parlar  poco,  simulare  assai,  e 
non  far  niento  "  (Venetian  envoy).  He  had  no  nephews,  but  his 
government  followed  the  caprices  of  Donna  Olimpia,  her  rivals, 
and  his  own  favourites.  His  policy,  as  far  as  he  had  one,  was 
pro-Spanish,  and  his  attack  on  the  Barberini  in  1646  was  against 
the  wishes  of  Mazarin.  Alexander  VII.  (1655-1667)  proved  to  be 
another  nonentity,  though  better  things  had  been  hoped  of  him. 
He  did,  however,  reform  the  administration  of  the  Curia  by 
reviving  and  reorganising  the  Congregations  of  Cardinals,  which 
Sixtus  V.  had  employed,  and  giving  them  real  administrative 
pov/er  in  their  different  departments. 

Alexander   had  really   meant  to   avoid   nepotism,   but    the 


356  A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

corrupt  influences  which  he  found  among  Innocent's  courtiers 
tempted  him  to  break  his  resolution.  He  therefore  sent  for 
Flavio  Chigi,  who  became  "  Cardinal  Padrone,"  and  took  the 
uncongenial  burden  of  government  away  from  his  uncle.  The 
institution  of  the  Congregation  of  State,  with  the  office  of  Secretary 
of  State,  had  given  the  Papacy  a  Prime  Minister,  and  with  the 
growth  of  order  and  system  in  the  administration,  the  govern- 
ment became  less  haphazard,  less  cosmopolitan,  and  more 
aristocratic.  Offices  were  given  to  men  of  good  family  in 
accordance  with  Alexander's  cvirious  principle  that  as  kings 
preferred  noblemen  to  wait  on  them,  so  a  priesthood  of  gentlemen 
must  be  "pleasing  to  God".  With  the  good  offices  of  Flavio 
Chigi  and  the  Secretary  of  State  to  relieve  him  from  his  duties, 
Alexander  sank  into  literary  ease  and  cultured  leisure.  He  was 
very  proud  of  the  conversion  to  Catholicism  of  Christina  of 
Sweden,  whose  master-mind  had  capitulated  to  the  logic  of  the 
Jesuits.  He  disapproved  of  her  unladylike  behaviour  when,  after 
her  abdication,  she  travelled  about  Europe,  rejoicing  in  her 
emancipation,  and  flaunting  her  eccentric  temperament  before  a 
half-admiring  and  half-scandalised  Europe.  But  Alexander 
welcomed  her  warmly,  and  encouraged  her  to  settle  down  under 
his  own  eye.  Since  his  benevolence  flattered  her  she  complied 
with  his  desire,  and  became  the  centre  of  a  salon-academy,  a 
patron  of  art  on  a  grand  scale,  and  a  secret  service  agent  in  the 
Catholic  interest. 

Alexander  was  succeeded  by  his  Secretary  of  State,  who,  as 
Clement  IX.  (1667-1670),  continued  the  negative  tradition  in 
politics  of  his  predecessors.  He  was  a  good,  kind,  and  edifying 
person,  whom  his  contemporaries  likened  to  a  tree  in  full 
blossom  which  bore  no  fruit.  His  pontificate  is  chiefly  mem- 
orable for  the  struggle  between  the  Jesuits  and  the  Jansenists, 
in  which  he  exercised  a  moderating  influence.  He  met  the 
Jansenists  half-way  by  requiring  only  the  minimum  of  refutation 
of  the  Five  Propositions  as  a  condition  for  their  absolution.  But 
Port  Royal  knew  that  the  victory  was  theirs,  and  history  proved 
that  a  stronger  force  was  needed  to  suppress  Jansenism  than  the 
waning  power  of  the  Papacy.  For  the  moment,  however,  the 
Jansenists  were  eclipsed  by  a  struggle  in  which  as  mystics  they 
had  no  part.  The  election  of  Clement  X.  (1670-1676)  was 
followed  by  the  outbreak  of  troubles  with  Louis  XIV,  Clement 
leaned  towards  Spain  in  his  European  policy,  and  Louis  therefore 
encroached  on  the  rights  of  the  Papacy  in  France.  In  his 
attempt  to  extend  the  rights  of  Regales  beyond  the  territories 
which  belonged  to  the  Crown  he  challenged  Clement  to  a  contest 


THE  SEVENTEENTPI  CENTURY  357 

which  had  long  been  imminent.  He  followed  thit;  up  by  further 
attacks  on  monastic  orders,  on  clerical  immunities,  and  on 
donations  to  Rome.  Two  Bishops  with  Janeenist  leanings,  who 
were  opposed  to  the  Jesuit  influence  at  court,  appealed  to  the 
Pope,  and  in  so  doing  made  the  quarrel  constitutional. 

The  accession  of  Innocent  XI.  (1676-1689)  was  unfortunate 
for  Louis,  for  he  now  had  to  meet  an  opponent  who  was  too  good 
for  him.  Innocent  followed  up  Clement's  ineffectual  protest  with 
three  strong  admonitions  to  Louis,  which  drew  down  on  him  the 
wrath  of  France,  and  brought  Louis  to  his  climax.  In  1682,  he 
summoned  the  clergy  to  St.  Germain,  and  after  long  discussions 
a  declaration  of  Four  Articles  was  drawn  up,  to  which  the 
assembly  was  required  to  subscribe.  The  Four  Articles  were  an 
epitome  of  Gallicanism.  They  aflirni  (1)  that  sovereigns  are 
not  subject  to  the  Pope  in  temporal  things ;  (2)  that  a  General 
Council  is  superior  to  a  Pope ;  (3)  that  the  power  of  the  Pope  is 
subject  to  the  regulations  of  a  Council,  and  that  the  Pope  cannot 
decide  anything  contrary  to  the  rules  and  constitutions  of  the 
Galilean  Church ;  (4)  that  decisions  of  the  Papacy  are  not 
irrevocable. 

No  Pope  who  was  conscious  of  his  responsibilities  towards 
Catholic  unity  could  let  such  a  declaration  stand.  Innocent 
condemned  it  in  a  Bull,  and  refused  to  ratify  the  appointment  of 
thirty  Bishops  who  were  responsible  for  framing  it.  The  situation 
was  very  like  the  troubles  with  England  under  Henry  VIII., 
except  that  Louis  wanted  nothing  from  the  Pope  and  so  could 
afford  to  wait,  whereas  Henry  in  his  urgency  to  obtain  the 
divorce  was, obliged  to  push  on  to  extremes.  Louis  was  careful 
to  temporise  and  keep  on  the  right  side  of  the  law,  and  thirty 
French  Sees  remained  unshepherded.  This  was  the  moment 
which  he  chose  for  his  persecutions  of  the  Huguenots,  which  were 
intended  to  prove  his  orthodoxy  to  French  Catholics  who  might 
have  qualms  about  it.  The  eloquence  of  Bossuet,  the  winning 
powers  of  the  Jesuits,  the  loneliness  of  emigration,  and  the 
cruelty  of  the  "Dragonades"  were  the  weapons  by  which  Louis 
tried,  and  tried  in  vain,  to  stamp  out  the  harmless  Huguenots 
whose  industrious  existence  was  an  offence  to  his  religious  and 
to  his  monarchical  pride.  Innocent's  magnificent  protest  against 
the  un-Christlike  "  conversion  by  armed  apostles  "  is  the  glory  of 
the  Papacy. 

Fresh  bitterness  was  added  to  the  quarrel  by  the  overbearing 
behaviour  of  the  French  Ambassador,  who  appeared  in  Rome  in 
1687  with  an  armed  retinue,  and  offended  the  papal  court  by  his 
arrogant  hostility.     Innocent's  fearless  and  calm  determination 


358  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

to  "walk  in  the  name  of  the  Lord"  irritated  Louis  into  further 
aggression.  He  appealed  to  a  General  Council,  attacked  Avignon, 
which  was  still  papal  property  —  imprisoned  a  nuncio,  and 
threatened  to  create  a  patriarchate  of  France.  Innocent  re- 
mained unmoved,  for  he  knew  that  the  day  of  reckoning  was 
at  hand.  Louis  had  aroused  the  antagonism  of  Europe,  and  in 
1687  he  was  threatened  by  a  combination  of  his  enemies  in  the 
League  of  Augsburg.  The  Papacy  gave  its  secret  support  to 
the  League,  and  found  itself  once  more  in  alliance  with  Pro- 
testantism against  a  Catholic  power.  It  was  not  without  some 
justification  that  the  Galilean  party  called  Innocent  the  Protest- 
ant Pope.  It  was  reserved  for  another  Innocent,  of  a  more 
accommodating  disposition,  to  receive  the  submission  of  France. 
The  war  with  the  League  of  Augsburg  and  the  influence  of 
Madame  de  Maintenon  combined  to  bring  Louis  to  his  senses :  he 
had  learnt  the  impolicy  of  alienating  two  large  sections  of  his  sub- 
jects at  once — the  Protestants  and  the  Jansenists — by  his  cruelty 
and  severity ;  the  Catholics  by  his  insults  to  the  Papacy ;  and 
both  sides  by  his  alliance  with  the  Turks.  In  1697  Innocent  XII. 
satisfied  himself  ])y  an  apology  in  which  the  Galilean  Bishops 
assured  him  of  their  "inexpressible  grief"  at  the  Declaration  of 
1682,  Louis  privately  withdrew  the  four  resolutions,  which  had 
become  the  law  of  the  land,  but  he  afterwards  swore  to  their 
validity  in  a  less  chastened  moment.  He  was  worsted,  but  not 
humbled. 

Innocent  XL  was  a  man  of  whom  even  his  enemies  found  it 
hard  to  speak  evil.  He  was  strong  enough  to  make  many 
enemies,  and  honourable  enough  to  silence  them.  His  reforms 
were  far-reaching  and  determined,  especially  in  respect  to  finance 
and  nepotism.  At  the  beginning  of  his  pontificate  the  Papacy 
was  threatened  with  bankruptcy,  for  corruption  and  impolicy  had 
combined  to  raise  the  expenditure  above  the  revenue.  By  a 
careful  reform  of  the  whole  financial  system  he  managed  to  re- 
store the  revenue,  and  by  reducing  the  interest  on  the  Monti,  in 
spite  of  protests,  he  gave  it  a  sound  economic  basis.  But  he 
realised  that  he  must  go  deeper  still  for  a  radical  cure.  He 
entirely  gave  up  nepotism,  and  kept  the  nephew  whom  he  loved 
at  a  distance  from  Rome.  In  spite  of  his  financial  difficulties, 
Innocent  gave  large  sums  to  Austria  for  the  wars  against  the 
Turks,  who  had  once  more  pressed  forward  and  laid  siege  to 
Vienna.  A  man  like  Innocent  was  bound  to  be  misunderstood 
by  his  contemporaries,  and  it  is  extraordinary  that  he  was  not 
worse  calumniated.  As  it  was,  his  financial  reforms  were  regarded 
as  parsimony,  his  austerity  as  inhumanity,  and  his  gentleness 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY  359 

towards  heretics  as  the  taint  of  heresy.  His  broad  and  etates- 
nian-Hke  views  condemned  alike  the  arrogance  of  Louis  XIV. 
and  the  bigotry  of  James  H.  of  England.  He  hated  with  im- 
partial intensity  the  futile  persecutions  of  the  court  of  Versailles 
and  the  impolitic  concessions  to  Catholicism  which  brought 
James  II.  to  his  ruin.  His  reward  was  that  Catholics  of  both 
courts  called  him  a  heretic,  while  William  III.  claimed  him  as 
an  ally. 

Tlie  short  pontificate  of  Alexander  VIII.  (1689-1691)  was  im- 
portant only  for  the  formal  close  of  the  quarrel  with  France  by  a 
papal  manifesto  of  1691  declaring  the  Articles  of  1682  to  be  in- 
valid, of  no  effect,  and  not  binding  even  on  those  who  had  sworn 
to  observe  them.  He  restored  nepotism  in  spite  of  the  good 
example  of  his  predecessor,  but — fortunately  perhaps — he  died 
before  much  harm  was  done. 

Innocent  XII.  (1691-1700)  brings  the  seventeenth  century  to 
an  honourable  end.  His  high  ideal,  his  blameless  character,  and 
his  love  of  justice  are  described  by  Browning  in  "  The  Ring  and 
the  Book".  Browning's  beautiful  portrait  of  Innocent  is  history 
expressed  in  terms  of  art :  it  fills  in  the  historical  outline  without 
violating  the  tracery  of  truth.  His  election  was  the  work  of  the 
French  party,  who  wanted  a  peaceable  man,  and  found  one.  He 
put  an  end  to  nepotism  for  ever  by  fixing  a  financial  limit  to  the 
offices  which  might  be  held  by  the  relations  of  a  Pope,  and  he 
"  reduced  the  power  of  money"  by  forbidding  the  sales  of  certain 
lucrative  ofiices.  Perhaps  he  was  sometimes  made  a  tool  of,  and 
perhaps  his  goodness  of  heart  was  imposed  upon  by  his  courtiers. 
The  public  audiences  which  he  gave  to  the  poor  seem  to  have 
given  more  consolation  than  redress,  and  it  was  said  that  his 
ministers  played  on  his  charity  to  distract  him  from  further 
projects  of  reform.  "If  he  could  always  act  for  himself,"  says 
Contarini,  "he  would  be  one  of  the  greatest  Popes." 

The  seventeenth  century,  with  all  its  great  upheavals,  its 
political  experiments,  and  its  religious  changes,  was  rich  in  such 
men.  In  the  modern  state  system  there  was  no  room  for  the 
Papacy,  but  the  gradual  withdrawal  of  the  Popes  from  European 
politics  was  the  emancipation  of  the  Catholic  character.  Great 
churchmen  were  still  great  politicians,  and  sometimes  corrupt 
ones,  but,  on  the  whole,  the  type  of  Bossuet  and  F^ndlon  tended 
to  supersede  the  type  of  Richelieu,  and  the  last  two  Innocents 
created  a  tradition  which  effaced  the  moral  relapse  of  Urban 
VIIT.  and  Innocent  X. 


CHAPTER  XXIX 

THE  CENTURY  OF  THE  ENLIGHTENMENT, 
A.D.  1700-1846 

IN  the  eighteenth  century  a  succession  of  innocent  Popes 
suffered  humiliation  at  the  hands  of  a  world  of  sinners, 
and  the  Papacy  had  to  face  the  consequences  of  all  the 
moral  shortcomings  of  its  history.  All  the  currents  of  hostile 
opinion  which  had  been  gaining  force  in  the  seventeenth  century 
beat  against  the  Rock  of  St.  Peter  in  the  eighteenth.  In  the  end 
they  broke  themselves  upon  it,  but  meanwhile  it  offered  an 
unresisting  front  to  the  attacks  of  wave  upon  wave  of  the  great 
tide  of  the  "  Enlightenment". 

The  moral  of  the  wars  of  the  Spanish  Succession,  with  which 
the  century  opens,  was  the  same  as  the  moral  of  the  Thirty 
Years'  War.  It  showed  that  the  Popes  must  pay  as  dearly  for 
not  taking  a  side  as  the  Popes  of  earlier  days  had  paid  for  doing 
so.  Clement  XI.  (1700-1721)  was  a  good  and  upright  man  who 
tried,  from  the  best  of  motives,  to  be  neutral  in  the  great  struggle, 
and  drew  down  on  himself  in  consequence  the  hostility  of  both 
sides.  He  was  naturally  inclined  to  take  the  side  of  Louis  XIV. 
— now  a  chastened  Catholic — who  wanted  to  give  Spain  to  his 
second  son,  the  adopted  heir  of  the  last  Hapsburg.  There  was 
more  than  one  reason  why  the  Popes  should  favour  this  Bourbon 
candidate.  It  was  still  a  part  of  their  policy  to  prefer  French  to 
Spanish  power  in  Naples,  so  as  to  avoid  the  uncomfortable 
position  of  being  between  the  two  fires  fed  with  the  same  Spanish 
fuel — Milan  and  Naples.  This  consideration  had  led  Innocent 
XII.  to  approve  and  perhaps  to  suggest  the  adoption  of  Philip  of 
France  by  Charles  II.  in  his  will.  Lastly,  the  Peace  of  West- 
phalia had  torn  the  Empire  and  the  Papacy  asunder,  and  the 
alliance  of  Austria  with  the  leading  Protestant  in  Europe,  William 
III.,  widened  the  breach. 

In  spite  of  all  this,  Clement  would  not  commit  himself  to  the 
recognition  of  Philip  as  King  of  Naples,  and  an  Austrian  army 
found  means  of  forcing  him  to  accept  the  Archduke  Charles.  At 
the  Peace  of  Utrecht,  1713,  neither  side  had  any  special  interest 
in  gratifying  the  Pope,  and  the  result  was  that  his  rights  were 

360 


THE  CENTURY  OF  THE  ENLIGHTENMENT     3G1 

set  aside  in  Naples,  in  Sicily,  in  Parma  and  Piacenza ;  the  new 
kingdom  of  Sardinia  was  given  to  Savoy  without  any  reference  to 
the  Pope.  Spain's  sudden  occupation  of  this  island  defeated 
Clement's  scheme  for  a  Crusade,  by  which  he  had  hoped  to 
restore  his  prestige.  The  fleet  which  he  had  persuaded  Spain  to 
contribute  was  used  by  Alberoni,  the  Spanish  minister,  for 
Sardinia,  and  the  eyes  of  Austria  were  turned  by  it  from  the 
East. 

The  new  King  of  Sardinia  said  of  Clement  that  "he  would 
always  have  been  esteemed  worthy  of  the  Papacy  if  he  had 
never  attained  it".  His  pontificate  occurred  at  one  of  those 
dangerous  moments  in  history  when  an  age  which  has  worn 
itself  out  is  passing  away.  The  last  phase  of  the  Grand  Monarque 
in  France  was  a  time  of  surging  intellectual  movement,  held 
under  by  the  militant  orthodoxy  of  the  old  King.  The  crushing 
and  unfortunate  Bull  "Unigenitus"  was  issued  by  Clement 
against  the  Jansenists  in  1713,  "pourfaire  plaisir  au  roi".  The 
progress  of  Jansenism  in  the  years  leading  up  to  "  Unigenitus " 
was  due  to  the  opposition  which  it  had  met.  Louis's  bout  of 
orthodoxy  found  an  outlet  in  the  destruction  of  the  Port  Royal 
Convent  in  1709.  Before  that  he  had  extorted  a  milder  form  of 
the  "  Unigenitus "  Bull  from  Clement  which  gave  him  power  to 
proceed  against  the  nuns.  Even  Fe'ndlon  had  approved  of  this 
earlier  Bull,  for  the  Jansenists  were  now  ubiquitous  and  defiant. 
But  persecution  had  the  usual  effect,  and  in  1710  F^n^lon  had 
to  own  that  the  Jansenists  were  everywhere — in  society,  at  the 
Sorbonne,  and  among  the  Clergy  and  the  religious  orders.  At 
the  time  of  the  death  of  Louis  in  1715,  France  was  divided  into 
two  camps ;  the  Jansenists  had  the  majority,  but  the  Jesuit — or 
"Unigenitus" — party  dominated  the  court.  The  question  at 
issue  turned  on  the  "Infallibility"  of  the  papal  Bull,  which  the 
Jansenists  disputed  and  the  Jesuits  afiirmed.  Under  the  Regency, 
the  Jansenists  were  at  first  tolerated,  owing  to  their  strength,  and 
the  general  relaxation  of  the  government.  But  the  peace  with 
Spain  produced  a  revival  of  the  Jesuit  influence,  and  in  1723  a 
Jansenist  says  that  "  Rome  rules  over  us  more  than  ever  it  did". 
The  young  King's  confessor  was  a  Jesuit,  and  the  "  Chambre  du 
Pape"  exercised  a  censorship  over  Jansenist  literature.  The  im- 
moral but  not  altogether  incapable  Dubois  bought  his  way  to 
the  Cardinalate  by  his  zeal  against  the  Jansenists  as  President 
of  the  Clerical  Assembly.  Finally,  in  1725,  Louis  XV.  was 
married  to  a  Polish  princess  who  bore  the  significant  nickname 
of  "Unigenita". 

But  the  opposition  was  no  longer  confined  to  a  group  of  unruly 


362     A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

and  unorthodox  mystics.  In  1721,  Montesquieu  published  his 
"Lettres  Persanes" — a  cold-blooded  and  obscene  piece  of  litera- 
ture with  which  the  age  of  reason  opened  its  direct  attack  on  the 
Papacy.  The  Pope,  according  to  Montesquieu,  was  an  old  idol 
worshipped  from  habit,  and  only  worth  attacking  because  of 
his  magician's  power  of  making  people  believe  absurdities. 
Montesquieu  was  not  the  first  to  throw  the  stone,  but  he  was  the 
most  skilled  in  hitting  the  mark.  Like  his  contemporaries,  he 
borrowed  his  negations  from  Montaigne,  his  ethics  from  the 
"Libertines"  of  the  seventeenth  century,  and  his  irony  from 
Bayle  (1646-1706).  These  things  were  what  is  called  "  in  the 
air,"  which  means  that  they  were  latent  in  the  unconscious  life 
of  the  early  eighteenth  century.  The  thin  veil  of  religion  under 
the  Maintenon  regime  barely  hid  the  atheism  which  was  the 
intellectual  fashion.  In  the  same  way  the  propriety  on  the 
surface  of  Louis's  court  life  half- revealed  the  "moral  chaos "- 
which  broke  through  under  the  Regency.  In  political  philosophy, 
too,  the  defenders  of  absolutism,  like  Hobbes,  passed  the  most 
vital  part  of  their  theory  to  the  upholders  of  constitutional 
government,  who  found  a  leader  in  Locke.  It  is  possible  to 
regard  the  eighteenth  century  as  the  age  which  unmasked 
hypocrisy  :  at  anyrate  it  must  be  exonerated  from  the  charge 
of  pretending,  to  be  other  than  it  was — irreligious,  defiant,  and 
licentious. 

Clement  XL  was  followed  by  three  successively  inconspicuous 
Popes,  under  whom  the  alliance  between  the  eighteenth-century 
philosophers  and  the  Jansenists  gained  ground  unchecked.  Inno- 
cent XIII.  (1721-1724)  was  kind-hearted  and  feeble  ;  Benedict 
XIII.  (1724-1730),  a  "  bonhomme  fort  pieux,  fort  faible,  et  fort 
sot,"  gave  the  forces  of  unbelief  fresh  grounds  for  blasphemy  by  the 
favour  which  he  showed  to  the  scandalous  Cardinal  Coscia,  who 
revived  the  practices  of  unregenerate  days  by  trafficking  in  spirit- 
ual privileges ;  Clement  XIL  (1730-1740)  was  dominated  by  his 
nephews  and  by  Cardinal  Alberoni,  the  leader  of  the  so-called 
"  Zelanti  "  party,  which  had  elected  him.  A  fierce  and  intricate 
struggle  over  the  antiquated  investiture  question  absorbed 
Clement's  pontificate,  the  outcome  of  which  was  the  election  in 
1740  of  Lambertini,  a  man  of  compromise,  whose  temperament 
was  a  surety  for  peace,  as  Benedict  XIV.  (1740-1758).  Walpole 
said  of  him  that  he  was  "  loved  by  Papists,  esteemed  by  Pro- 
testants, a  priest  without  insolence  or  interest,  a  prince  without 
favourites,  a  Pope  without  nephews  ".  The  picture  is  a  negative 
one,  and  inasmuch  as  it  is  true  it  condemns  the  subject.  For 
the  times  demanded  other  qualities  in  a  Pope  than  those  which 


THE  CEKTUKY  OF  THE  ENLIGHTENMENT    3G3 

the  ''  merry  witty  Bolognese  "  had  to  offer.     His  policy  in  Italy 
and  in  Spain  was  based  on  compromise  and  concession,  and  it 
might  be  claimed  that  his  lack  of  interest  in  temporal  politics 
was   at   least   as   much   a  virtue  as  a  fault.     But  the  mind  of 
Europe  was  now  centred  in  France,  and  a  policy  of  drift  among 
the  contlietinq;  currents  there  was  disastrous  for  St.  Peter's  ship. 
The  Pope  was  fatally  addicted  to  literature,  and  as  the  personal 
friend  of  Voltaire  and  patron  of  Montesquieu  it  was  hard  for  him 
to  stand  aloof  from  the  "  Esprit  philosophique  "  which  was  so 
closely  allied  to  the  twin  monsters  of  atheism  and  Jansenism. 
The  Jesuit  spirit,  on  the  other  hand,  was  uncongenial  to  him, 
although  he  was  the  personal  friend  of  the  General  of  the  Order. 
In  1742  Voltaire  dedicated  his  drama  "  Mahomet"  to  Benedict 
XIV.,  and  the  Pope  thanked  him  for  the  compliment,  in  spite  of 
the  fact  that  its  publication  was  forbidden  in  Paris.     In  1748  he 
gave  the  author  of  the  "Esprit  des  Lois"  a  dispensation  from 
fasting,  but  the  Jesiiits  and  Jansenists  combined  for  once  in  an 
outcry  which  compelled  him  to  put  the  book  on  the  Index,  in 
spite  of  which  it  ran  through  twenty-one  editions.     The  publica- 
tion of  the  Encyclopedia— the  "  Bible  of  unbelief  "—containing 
articles   on   all  the   debatable    points    which   Catholicism    had 
omitted  to  defend,  gave  fresh  impetus  to  the  atheistical  move- 
ment.    The  career  of  Madame  Pompadour,  in  her  character  of 
reUgious  arbiter  between  the  Jesuits  and  Jansenists,  supplied  the 
necessary  moral  indignation  without  which  the  crusades  of  anti- 
religion   inevitably   miss  the  mark.     Against  the  worst  danger 
which  Catholicism  had  ever  had  to  face  from  without,  the  forces 
of  the  Church  were  not  only  divided  but  subdivided  into  hostile 
camps.     At  the   moment   when   the  Jesuit  and  Jansenist  duel 
had  broken  out  with  renewed  vigour,  at  the  end  of  the  pontifi- 
cate of  Benedict  XIV.,  the  Jesuits  were  divided  against  them- 
selves into  two  rival  parties  by  the   question   of  reform.     The 
spirit  of  worldliness  had  found  its  way  through  the  vulnerable 
points  in  the  fortress  of  the  Society  of  Jesus.     Their  connection 
with  politics,  and  in  particular  the  independence  of  the  Jesuit 
State  of  Paraguay,  involved  them  in  political  complications  with 
Spain  and  Portugal.     Their  commercial  rivals  in  the  wine  trade 
attacked  them  by  demanding  a  Visitation  of  the  Order.     It  was 
therefore  highly  necessary  to  them  that  a  Pro- Jesuit  Pope  should 
be  appointed  to  succeed   Benedict  and  to  defend  the  order  in 

case  of  need. 

The  election  of  Clement  XIII.  (1758-1769)  was  therefore 
worked  by  the  Jesuits  for  their  own  advantage.  But  they  poon 
found   out  that  he   was   "  Nathaniel— not   an   Apostle  "—or   in 


364    A  SHOKT  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

other  words  a  weak  reed.  It  might  have  been  impossible  even 
for  a  strong  champion  to  save  the  Jesuits  at  this  time,  for  the 
storm-clouds  were  gathering  fast  against  them.  Weakened  out- 
wardly by  their  contests  with  Jansenism,  and  inwardly  by  the 
wear  and  tear  to  their  ideals,  to  which  their  intimacy  with  the 
world  had  peculiarly  exposed  them,  the  Jesuits  had  to  face  a 
Bourbon  combination  against  them,  based  on  the  report  of  a 
hostile  Visitation,  and  supported  in  France  by  a  charge  of 
regicide  doctrine,  and  in  Spain  by  supposed  responsibility  for  a 
series  of  popular  uprisings.  In  1762  the  Jesuit  schools  were 
closed  in  France,  and  two  years  later  the  Order  was  expelled  from 
the  country.  Clement  tried  to  save  them,  and  the  Bull  "  Apostoli- 
cum  Pascendi"  in  1765  was  intended  to  ward  off  the  anger  of  the 
King  of  Spain.  But  it  was  too  late.  The  Jesuits  had  aroused 
too  many  storms  of  hatred  for  anything  less  than  a  strong  and 
steady  blast  of  Catholic  enthusiasm  to  counter,  and  there  was 
no  quarter  in  eighteenth-century  Europe  from  which  such  a 
wind  could  be  expected  to  blow.  Charles  III.  of  Spain  was  not 
at  heart  antagonistic  to  the  Jesuits,  but  his  ministers  were 
Jansenists  and  it  was  always  easy  to  make  the  Jesuit  doctrines 
responsible  for  anarchical  movements.  So  in  1767,  the  Jesuits 
were  expelled  from  Spain  and  their  interesting  political  experi- 
ment in  Paraguay  came  to  an  end.  Before  the  end  of  Clement's 
pontificate  something  like  a  Jesuit  war  was  being  waged  in 
Europe,  and  his  death  in  1769  meant  life  or  death  to  the  Order 
which  he  had  striven  in  vain  to  uphold. 

The  election  of  Ganganelli  as  Clement  XIV.  (1769-1744)  was 
so  great  a  disappointment  to  the  Zelanti,  as  the  Jesuit  party  were 
called,  that  they  afterwards  denied  its  validity  on  the  plea  that 
simony  was  involved.  Clement  loved  peace  and  justice,  and 
hated  persecution.  But  he  was  wearied  with  the  tedious  com- 
plaints  of  the  Jesuits  and  the  importunities  of  their  enemies  the 
Bourbon  princes.  He  gave  concessions  in  order  to  gain  time, 
and  succeeded  in  delaying  the  official  condemnation  of  the 
Order,  for  which  Europe  was  clamouring,  for  four  more  years. 
But  it  had  to  come,  and  in  1773  the  Bull  was  drafted  which  dis- 
banded the  spiritual  army  of  the  Church.  The  Jesuits  were 
ofi"ered  pensions  if  they  would  give  up  their  Order,  but  the 
unequalled  discipline  which  Loyola  had  given  to  his  followers 
stood  them  in  good  stead  at  the  last,  and  the  Society  of  Jesus 
survived  even  this  last  and  most  insidious  of  the  many  attacks 
which  were  intended  to  destroy  it.  It  survived,  and  that  was  all. 
Its  power  was  annulled  and  its  influence  relegated  to  subterranean 
channels  and  far-away  haunts.      But  it  held  together  in  the 


THE  CENTUKY  OF  THE  ENLIGHTENMENT    365 

darkness  and  waited  for  the  light  which  would  surely  break  over 
the  world  when  the  glare  of  the  "enlightenment"  should  pass 
away,  and  the  dawn  of  a  purer  religion  gladden  the  life  of  man. 
The  herald  of  that  dawn  was  already  on  the  wing  when 
America  ''shouted  to  liberty"  in  1776,  and  fifteen  years  later  laid 
down  the  great  amendment  to  the  Declaration  of  Independence 
which    announced   the   birth  of    religious    freedom,   miscalled 
toleration,  in  the  New  World.     It  is  the  glory  of  America  to 
have  discovered  the  great  truth,  which  centuries  of  persecution 
had   failed   to   bring   home  to  the   Old  World,  that   the   State 
cannot  "  tolerate  "  religion  :  the  State  can  only  recognise  spiritual 
freedom.      In  maintaining   that  "Congress   shall  make  no  law 
respecting  an  establishment  of  religion,  or  prohibiting  the  free 
exercise  thereof,  or  abridging  the  freedom  of  speech,  or  of  the 
press,"   America   has   made  a   stand   in   history   for  which  all 
nations  should  call  her  blessed,  and  to  which  the  Old  World  has 
capitulated,  in  more  or  less  degree,  ever  since.     But  the  truth 
which  the  New  World  had  stumbled  upon  was  not  recognised  at 
once  in  the  Old.     The  Papacy,  being  weak,  had  to  face  a  new 
access  of  poHtical  opposition  from  Germ.any.    An  Erastian  party, 
headed    by  Von    Hontheim,    Elector  of    Treves,   demanded  a 
National  Church  on  a  plan  similar  to  that  which  Henry  VIII. 
had  wished  to  establish  in  England.     The  Emperor,  Joseph  II. 
of  Austria   (1780-1792),   embarked  on  a  policy  of  suppressing 
monasteries  and  dictating  public  worship.     To  make  him  desist 
Pius  VI.  set  out  from  Rome  and  first  earned  the  title  of  the 
"Apostolic   pilgrim"  by  his   unsuccessful   mission.     In  France 
the  gathering  storm-clouds  were  beginning  to  swallow  up  the 
whole  prospect,  and  sweep  the  various  currents  of  philosophical 
dispute  into  the  one  vast  and  overwhelming  force  of  the  Revolu- 
tion.    At  first  the  Church  in  France  supported  the  Revolution, 
but  in  May,  1790,  it  was  alienated  by  a  series  of  hostile  enact- 
ments, and  although  some  clergy  submitted  to  them,  the  majority 
went  into  opposition  and  stood  out  boldly  against  the  approach- 
ing madness  of  the  Terror.     An  oath  was  imposed  which  the 
Pope  condemned,  and  the  King  fled  to  avoid  the  apostasy  of 
acquiescence.     So  that  when  the  Monarchy  fell  in  August,  1792, 
the  Catholic   religion    fell   with  it,  and   the   establishment  of 
atheism  in  1793  was  the  logical  outcome  of  earlier  events.     The 
passing  of  the  Terror  brought  no  mitigation  of  the  hostility  with 
which  the  ruling  powers  treated  the  Church,  and  the  only  act  of 
toleration  which  was  passed  was  instantly  withdrawn  in  1797. 

One  might  have  expected  that  Napoleon  would  have  used 
the  Church  as  an  ally  in  the  restoration  of  that  good  order  which 


366  A  SHOET  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

was  necessary  to  military  success.  Such,  indeed,  was  his  pro- 
fessed attitude  to  it.  "I  regard  religion,"  he  said,  "not  as  the 
mystery  of  the  Incarnation,  but  as  the  secret  of  social  order." 
And  yet  Napoleon's  policy  towards  the  Papacy  was  from  the 
first  hostile  and  aggressive.  In  1796  the  French  armies  invaded 
Bologna  and  the  old  Pope  had  to  buy  a  truce  on  heavy  terms 
which  he  could  not  fulfil.  Having  thus  succeeded  in  putting 
Pius  VI.  at  a  disadvantage  Napoleon  pressed  it  home ;  he  seized 
Ancona  and  threatened  Rome.  Pius  was  compelled  to  make 
peace,  and  Joseph  Bonaparte  was  sent  as  ambassador  to  Rome 
with  orders  to  create  discord.  The  Roman  democrats  were 
encouraged  to  invite  French  help  in  a  revival  of  the  republican 
movement,  with  the  result  that  the  papal  troops  found  them- 
selves once  more  at  war  with  the  French.  The  French  general, 
Berthier,  entered  Rome  in  the  name  of  France  and  occupied  the 
castle  of  St.  Angelo  while  the  Republicans  took  the  city.  The  old 
Pope,  now  in  his  eighties,  confronted  the  soldiers  bravely  and 
submitted  to  insult  in  the  Vatican,  and  one  may  hope  that  he 
had  the  consolation  of  knowing  that  his  victors  had  made  the 
fatal  mistake  which  throughout  history  had  overtaken  the 
oppressors  of  St.  Peter.  Pius  VI.  was  sent  away  in  a  carriage  to 
the  Dominicans  at  Siena  and  thence  to  Valence,  where  in  the 
course  of  the  year  1798  he  died  of  a  broken  heart. 

The  lack  of  money  had  forced  Napoleon  into  this  first  great 
indiscretion  in  hisi  dealings  with  the  Papacy.  The  lack  of  his- 
torical insight  made  it  possible  for  him  to  go  further  in  the  same 
mistaken  direction.  At  the  time  of  the  election  of  Pius  VII. 
(1800-1814)  there  were  signs  abroad  that  a  religious  revival  was 
about  to  set  in.  The  Church  in  France  had  never  lost  its  hold 
on  the  provinces,  and  under  the  Directory  the  priests  began  quietly 
to  return  to  Paris.  The  so-called  Constitutional  Church,  which 
had  bent  itself  to  the  varying  will  of  the  revolutionary  State,  had 
forfeited  the  respect  which  it  had  never  deserved,  while,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  priests  who  had  remained  loyal  to  the  Papacy 
reaped  the  harvest  of  persecution  in  the  love  and  reverence  of 
sincere  Catholics  throughout  France.  The  First  Consul,  although 
he  professed  himself  frankly  to  be  more  a  Mohammedan  than 
anything  else,  declared  his  willingness  to  make  Catholicism 
"  dominant "  in  France.  The  wearied  French  Catholics  and  the 
sympathetic  new  Pope  were  alike  unable  to  see  the  difl"erence  be- 
tween the  patronising  ofi'er  of  Napoleon  and  the  American  system 
which  their  hearts  desired.  Even  if  it  did  not  satisfy  the  more 
enlightened  among  them,  it  was  acceptable  on  the  grounds  that 
half  a  loaf  is  better  than  no  bread.     So,  in  spite  of  suspicions  on 


THE  CENTURY  OF  THE  ENLIGHTENMENT    3G7 

both  sides,  the  terms  of  Napoleon  were  formulated  and  sent  to 
Rome  in  the  draft  of  the  first  Concordat.  The  words  "  dominant 
religion"  were  changed  to  the  more  non-committal  "religion  of 
the  majority,"  and  the  minister  sent  to  Rome  to  present  the 
agreement  was  instructed  to  "  behave  towards  the  Pope  as  though 
he  was  in  command  of  two  hundred  thousand  men".  The  Pope 
stood  out  against  certain  features  of  Napoleon's  offer,  and  par- 
ticularly in  regard  to  four  points.  He  opposed  Napoleon's  desire 
to  recognise  the  "constitutional"  clergy,  by  whom  the  papal 
authority  had  been  set  aside.  He  objected  to  the  confiscation  of 
Church  lands  on  the  system  laid  down  by  the  Concordat.  He 
insisted  that  the  Bishops  at  present  in  occupation  of  the  Sees  of 
France  should  resign,  and  that  the  Catholic  religion  should  be 
recognised  as  the  State  religion  if  the  State  was  to  claim  the 
right  to  make  appointments  to  vacant  bishoprics.  The  Pope's 
delay  in  accepting  his  terms  irritated  Napoleon,  but,  after  tearing 
up  the  Pope's  reply,  he  eventually  signed  the  document. 

The  first  Concordat,  which  was  signed  in  1801  and  published 
in  1802,  was  in  itself  a  good  offer  from  the  Catholic  point  of 
view.  It  safeguarded  the  honour  of  the  French  Catholics  and 
of  the  Papacy,  and,  of  course,  Pius  VII.  accepted  it.  The  difficulty 
was  to  make  the  compromise  workable,  and  this  obvious  defect 
gave  to  the  First  Consul  his  opportunity  to  juggle  with  the  Con- 
cordat to  his  own  advantage.  Under  the  guise  of  an  appendix 
intended  to  fill  in  the  details  of  its  administration,  Napoleon  in- 
vented the  so-called  '^  Organic  Articles,"  which,  in  practice,  gave 
entire  control  of  the  Church  in  France  to  himself  and  "  bound 
the  Church  by  links  of  steel  and  gold  to  every  French  Govern- 
ment down  to  the  year  1905".  But  the  First  Consul  had  once 
more  gained  the  shadow  and  lost  the  substance  of  power.  He 
pressed  his  advantage  home  to  the  uttermost.  He  demanded 
the  creation  of  five  French  Cardinals  to  safeguard  his  influence 
in  the  Consistory,  and  he  secured  in  1803  a  Concordat  for  the 
Italian  Church  on  the  same  lines  as  that  of  France.  But  the 
total  result  amounted  to  something  different  from  the  First 
Consul's  intention.  The  spirit  of  Catholicism,  refreshed  by  the 
outward  peace,  gained  strength  to  resist  him,  and  the  Gallican- 
ism  which  he  wished  to  foster  languished  under  his  care,  while 
the  ultra-montane  spirit  revived,  and,  through  the  events  which 
followed,  burned  with  a  steady  flame  of  loyalty  to  the  ill-treated 
Pope. 

In  the  course  of  the  year  1802  Napoleon  became  First  Consul 
for  life,  and  it  was  clear  that  he  was  aiming  at  the  Crown.  In 
1804  he  became  Emperor  and  desired  papal  confirmation  of  his 


368  A  SHOET  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 


act.  Pius  set  out  for  Paris  to  perform  the  Coronation,  in  ignor 
ance  of  the  fact  that  Napoleon  had  already  crowned  himself,  and 
to  perform  the  marriage  of  Napoleon  with  Josephine.  He  returned 
to  Rome  without  having  secured  a  single  privilege,  and  in  the 
same  year  a  further  cause  of  hostility  arose.  Napoleon's  "  little 
brother  Jerome"  had  contracted  an  awkward  marriage  with 
Miss  Paterson  of  Baltimore,  which,  in  view  of  a  higher  destiny, 
Napoleon  wished  to  have  annulled.  The  marriage  being  perfectly 
canonical,  Pius  refused  to  do  so,  whereupon  Napoleon  annulled 
it  himself  by  imperial  decree.  A  further  quarrel  in  1805  turned 
on  the  garrisoning  of  Ancona  by  Napoleon.  This  exploit  of 
Napoleon's  at  the  time  of  the  Austrian  war  had  caused  a  dispute 
between  Austria,  who  thought  that  the  Pope  should  have  pre- 
vented it,  but  the  Pope  dared  neither  oppose  Napoleon  nor 
confess  to  Austria  his  inability  to  restrain  him.  The  battle  of 
Trafalgar  in  1805  gave  him  the  necessary  courage  to  complain, 
and  in  answering  him  Napoleon  adopted  the  Charlemagne  tone, 
and  declared  that  he  had  garrisoned  Ancona  for  the  defence  of 
the  Pope.  Pius  disclaimed  both  the  obligation  and  the  need  of 
such  protection,  and  expostulated  further  against  Joseph  Bona- 
parte's action  in  seizing  the  throne  of  Naples  without  regard  to 
the  papal  suzerainty  thereof. 

The  Emperor  replied  as  a  mediaeval  Emperor  would  have 
done.  He  niarched  an  army  into  the  papal  States,  and  gave  the 
Pope's  possessions  in  Naples  to  Talleyrand.  Finding  the  Pope 
unshaken  in  spirit,  he  threatened  in  1806  to  occupy  the  whole 
papal  territory.  Pius  still  held  out;  he  opposed  Napoleon  in 
Venice,  and,  in  1807,  he  offered  to  close  the  ports  which 
Napoleon  already  held.  Pius  had  a  gentle  Christian  soul,  but  he 
had  the  courage  necessary  to  maintain  his  dignity.  He  would 
be  conquered  if  he  must,  but  he  would  not  submit,  and  in  this 
he  persisted  through  all  his  troubles  to  the  great  embarrassment 
of  his  oppressor.  In  1809  the  papal  States  fell  to  Napoleon,  the 
papal  army  was  absorbed  into  the  French  army,  and  the  Pope 
was  surrounded  by  Frenchmen.  Finally,  Rome  itself  was  an- 
nexed, and  the  tricouleur  replaced  the  papal  banner.  Pius  still 
thundered  his  condemnation,  and  the  Bull  "  Cum  Memoranda  " 
asserted  the  Papal  supremacy  in  uncompromising  terms,  and  the 
utter  condemnation  and  excommunication  of  his  enemies.  His 
behaviour  was  both  courageous  and  masterly.  Napoleon  carried 
him  off  first  to  Florence  and  then  to  Savona,  wishing  to  exhibit 
to  the  world  the  humiliating  position  to  which  his  power  had 
brought  the  successor  of  St,  Peter.  But  Pius  turned  his  captivity 
into  a  catastrophe  by  refusing  to  perform  pontifical  acts.     Na- 


I 


THE  CENTURY  OF  THE  ENLIGHTENMENT    3G9 

)oleon  above  all  wanted  his  divorce,  which  Pius  refused  to  give, 
rhe  Emperor  then  tried,  as  others  had  tried  before  him,  to  do 
vithout  the  Pope,  but  his  failure  was  assured.  The  so-called 
'Gallican  experiment"  turned  against  himself.  The  Commis- 
ion  summoned  to  endorse  his  ecclesiastical  policy  declared  him 
n  the  wrong,  and  had  to  be  dismissed.  The  8enatus  Consulta 
>f  181U  decreed  the  adherence  of  future  Popes  to  the  Declaration 
>f  1682.  The  Cardinals  were  attacked  for  their  refusal  to  nullify 
■s^apoleon's  marriage  with  Josephine,  and  dispense  his  marriage 
vith  Marie-Louise.  Tho);e  who  refused  were  degraded  and  be- 
;ame  "  Black  Cardinals  '.  Pius  himself  continued  to  hold  out, 
md  demanded  his  liberty  before  he  would  discuss  negotiations. 

In  January,  1811,  a  new  Commission  demanded  the  liberation 
)f  the  Pope.  In  June  a  National  Council  was  summoned,  which 
ihowed  increased  loyalty  to  Pius,  and  refused  to  act  independ- 
sntly  of  him.  An  unsigned  document,  promising  to  appoint 
Bishops  within  six  months  or  forfeit  his  rights  to  the  Metropolitan, 
vas  produced  by  Napoleon  as  coming  from  the  Pope,  but  the 
;:!ouncil  had  to  be  reformed  before  its  ratification  of  the  document 
;ould  be  extorted.  Even  then  the  papal  confirmation  was 
lecessary,  and,  until  September,  Pius  held  out.  But  he  finally 
;ave  way  and  signed  it  in  a  form  which  Napoleon  thought  to  be 
00  pontifical  and  insufficiently  Gallican.  It  was,  however,  a 
ign  of  weakening.  The  old  Pope  was  enfeebled  by  captivity, 
md,  when  he  found  himself  carried  ofi'  to  the  lovely  splendour  of 
^ontainebleau,  his  resistance  for  a  time  broke  down.  He  signed 
he  preliminary  draft  of  the  Concordat  of  Fontainebleau  on  Janu- 
iry  18,  1813,  and  thus  abandoned  his  rights  of  institution  in 
France.  He  afterwards  retracted  his  consent,  but  his  breach  of 
aith  was  more  deplorable  than  his  momentary  weakness. 

The  year  1813  saw  the  sunset  of  the  Napoleonic  power,  and 
n  1814  Pius  VII.  was  free  and  on  his  vv^ay  to  Rome,  having  been 
iberated  at  the  demand  of  the  allies.  The  failure  of  Napoleon 
n  his  treatment  of  the  Church  might  seem  to  be  only  incidental 
0  his  failure  to  establish  a  permanent  hegemony  in  Europe,  but 
n  reality  the  victory  of  the  Church  was  a  real  victory,  due  to  the 
imitation  of  the  Emperor's  vision.  He  had  wanted  the  alliance 
)f  the  Pope,  and  tried  first  by  agreement  and  afterwards  by  force 
;o  obtain  it.  He  failed  to  realise  that  the  alliance  which  he 
sought  would  be  valueless  unless  it  were  bestowed  by  the  free- 
vill  of  the  Pope.  The  Church  must  be  free  or  else  it  ceases  to 
36  itself,  and  it  is  in  virtue  of  this  axiom  that  it  has  always  been 
ible  to  take  captivity  captive. 

The  Rome  to  which  Pius  VII.  returned  after  his  exile  greeted 

24 


370  A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

him  with  the  pathetic  enthusiasm  which  was  reminiscent  of  the 
Middle  Ages.  For  Rome  was  now  as  ever  a  prey  to  the  inevit- 
able  spirit  of  faction,  but  in  place  of  the  greater  duels  of  earlier 
times  bands  of  robbers  and  organised  brigands  struck  terror  and 
admiration  into  the  hearts  of  the  inconsistent  populace.  Secret 
societies  of  all  kinds  flourished,  and  were  classed  under  the  head- 
ing of  "freemasons".  To  cope  with  these  disorders  the  Pope 
found  himself  faced  with  a  totally  inadequate  revenue  and  a 
chaotic  system  of  government.  Napoleon  had  temporarily  in- 
creased the  papal  revenue  by  selling  Church  property,  but  most 
of  these  funds  were  already  spent  and  there  were  Congregations 
and  Cardinalates  to  be  endowed,  in  addition  to  the  restoration  of 
nearly  two  thousand  monasteries  and  612  convents. 

To  help  him  in  the  superhuman  task  which  confronted  him 
the  old  Pope  had  at  his  side  the  master-mind  of  the  Cardinal 
Consalvi.  It  was  he  who  had  strengthened  by  his  presence  and 
counsel  the  resistance  of  the  Pope  at  Fontainebleau,  and  it  was 
he  who  had  upheld  the  power  of  the  Papacy  at  the  Congress  of 
Vienna.  Napoleon  said  of  him,  "  This  man,  who  never  would 
become  a  priest,  is  more  of  a  priest  than  all  the  others". 
Consalvi  lived  in  the  world  the  life  of  a  man  of  the  world,  and  it 
was  inconsistent  with  his  theories  that  such  a  man  as  himself 
should  be  a  priest.  He  therefore  refused  to  burden  himself  with 
the  priestly  office  and  remained  only  in  the  minor  orders  neces- 
sary to  his  acceptance  of  the  cardinalate.  On  his  return  from 
the  Congress  of  Vienna  he  became  "  the  soul  of  the  Pope,"  and 
in  1816  he  put  into  effect  his  programme  for  the  government  of 
the  Patrimony.  The  system  which  he  favoured  was  a  form  of 
Napoleonic  bureaucracy,  known  as  the  "Montuproprio".  He 
divided  the  papal  territories  into  twenty-one  Delegations  over 
which  Cardinals  presided,  with  Governors  under  them  selected 
from  the  prelature.  Consalvi's  government  never  had  a  chance 
of  success,  for  it  depended  on  the  existence  of  competent  officials, 
and  there  were  none  to  be  found.  Moreover,  there  was  a  vigorous 
opposition,  headed  by  his  rival,  Cardinal  Pacca,  and  supported 
by  the  reactionary  element  among  the  Cardinals  and  by  those 
whose  privileges  were  menaced  by  the  revival  of  government. 
The  opposition  could  point  to  serious  defects  and  still  more 
serious  gaps  in  the  work  of  Consalvi.  His  attempt  to  deal  with 
the  brigands  by  a  treaty  was  ingenious  but  not  practical.  On 
the  principle  of  "set  a  thief  to  catch  a  thief"  he  gave  rise  to  a 
ghastly  vendetta  between  two  of  the  chief  robber  families,  who 
attacked  one  another  in  the  interests  of  the  peace.  A  still  more 
vital  defect  was  the  total  lack  of  any  system  of  education,  for 


THE  CENTURY  OF  THE  ENLIGHTENMENT    371 

this  undermined  the  whole  structure  on  which  his  bureaucracy 
should  have  rested.  The  total  ignorance  both  of  the  rulers  and 
of  the  ruled  produced  injustice  and  incompetence  on  the  one 
hand  and  lawlessness  on  the  other. 

In  guiding  the  foreign  policy  of  the  Pope,  Consalvi  showed  a 
truer  statesmanship.  Dm'ing  his  absence  at  Vienna,  Cardinal 
della  Genga  had  persuaded  Pius  to  repudiate  all  the  agreements 
with  France  since  1797,  on  the  ground  that  they  had  been 
extorted  by  force,  and  to  reinstate  the  old  Bishops  in  place  of 
the  "  Eveques  de  circonstance,"  as  the  more  accommodating  Con- 
cordat Bishops  were  called.  Consalvi  realised  that  this  was  fatal 
and  protested  vehemently  to  Cardinal  Pacca,  proposing  as  an 
alternative  that  alterations  should  be  made  in  the  Concordat. 
In  1815,  he  drew  up  the  alterations,  which  were  duly  ratified  by 
Pius  in  June,  1817.  But  the  evils  which  had  been  wrought  by 
the  attempted  breach  of  faith  could  only  be  modified  by  the 
later  and  more  honourable  policy.  In  Germany,  the  influence 
of  Metternich  encouraged  the  national  spirit  at  the  expense  of 
the  Pope,  especially  in  Bavaria,  Hanover,  and  the  Upper  Rhine. 
But  Consalvi  watched  his  opportunities  and  in  course  of  time, 
Metternich's  growing  Catholicism  enabled  him  to  make  treaties 
with  Bavaria,  with  Prussia,  and  with  the  Upper  Rhine,  and 
subsequently  with  Russia. 

In  Italy,  Consalvi  was  lenient  to  the  nationalist  movements 
and  opposed  to  cruelty.  King  Victor  Emmanuel  of  Sardinia  was 
his  close  friend  and  ally,  and  the  King  of  Naples  was  bought  by 
the  promise  of  papal  support  in  his  attempt  to  establish  his 
absolutism.  Consalvi  was  very  friendly  to  England — more  so 
than  to  Ireland,  and  he  urged  the  Pope  not  to  abandon  the  cause 
of  the  Catholic  emancipation  to  please  the  lawless  Irish.  There 
was  some  trouble  with  Russia  concerning  the  proposal  to  establish 
a  Metropolitan  Bishop  at  Vilna,  but  Consalvi  made  peace  in 
spite  of  it,  and  conceded  the  right  to  the  Czar  Alexander — 
although  schismatic — of  nominating  candidates  to  Catholic 
bishoprics  in  his  dominions. 

In  August,  1823,  Pius  VII.  ended  his  long  and  weary  pilgrim- 
age upon  earth,  and  his  heart-broken  friend  and  adviser  followed 
him  five  months  later.  In  their  lighter  moments  the  two  friends 
had  worked  together  for  the  revival  of  art,  and  under  their  in- 
spiration a  new  wing  of  the  Vatican  was  opened,  and  gave  a 
symbol  to  the  world  of  the  restoration  of  holy  religion. 

Pius  VII.  was  succeeded  by  the  old  enemy  of  Consalvi,  Cardinal 
della  Genga,  who  took  the  name  of  Leo  XII.  (1823-1829).  He 
put  a  summary  conclusion  to  the  work  of  his  rival  by  a  complete 


372    A  SHOKT  HISTORY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

reversal  of  his  policy  along  the  lines  of  extreme  reaction.  A 
rule  of  violent  severity  did  much  to  foster  the  underlying  current 
of  liberalism  which  was,  of  course,  strengthened  into  fuller  life  by 
persecution.  Under  Leo,  Cardinal  Rivarola  condemned  508 
"Carbonari,"  or  members  of  secret  societies,  without  trial,  in 
three  months,  while  368  persons  were  placed  under  supervision 
and  forced  to  keep  spiritual  observances.  Forced  marriages 
between  rival  sects,  persecutions  of  the  Jews,  the  supervision  of 
education  by  the  Jesuits,  all  tended  to  fill  the  same  stream  with 
the  rising  current  of  revolutionary  discontent.  The  reaction 
continued  under  Pius  VIII.  (1829-1830),  and  the  accession  of  the 
monk  Capellari,  as  Gregory  XVI.  (1830-1846),  carried  it  to  its 
zenith.  A  sudden,  violent,  and  short-lived  revolution  in  the 
States  of  the  Church  led  the  Pope  to  turn  for  help  to  Austria  and 
so  to  give  away  his  hard- won  independence.  The  result  was  that 
the  European  powers  claimed  the  right  to  help  the  Pope  to  put 
an  end  to  the  misrule  in  his  dominion,  and  demanded  the 
participation  of  laymen  in  the  government  of  the  States  of  the 
Church.  Gregory  acceded,  but  afterwards  went  back  on  his  con- 
sent ;  this  resulted  in  further  intervention  by  Austria,  and  then 
counter-intervention  by  France  at  Ancona,  which  town  became 
the  rallying-point  of  the  liberal  cause.  The  cruelty  with  which 
the  Pope's  hired  soldiers  repressed  the  revolt,  and  the  harslmess 
of  the  reign  of  reaction,  led  in  1845  to  the  Protest  of  Rimini, 
which  was  an  appeal  for  the  redress  of  grievances  addressed  by 
the  Pope's  subjects  to  the  powers  of  Europe.  But  the  Pope 
once  more  took  refuge  behind  the  buttress  which  Austria  was 
only  too  ready  to  provide  and  remained  in  this  attitude  until  his 
death  in  1846. 


CHAPTER  XXX 

CONCLUSION 

THERE  have  been  moments  in  history  when  man's  need 
of  religion  has  seemed  pecuUarly  urgent.  These  are 
the  moments  of  the  greatest  danger  for  the  Churches. 
For  if  the  old  bottles  cannot  contain  the  new  wine  the  energy  of 
the  human  spirit  will  find  new  channels  in  ways  apart.  Such  a 
moment  was  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century,  and  it  was 
no  doubt  partly  to  be  ascribed  to  a  reaction  from  the  religious 
lethargy  of  the  century  of  the  Enlightenment.  The  romantic 
movement  in  literature  turned  men's  minds  to  history — not  so 
much  to  the  critical  and  scientific  study  of  the  past  as  to  the 
thrilling  pageantry  of  historical  continuity.  "I  belong,"  wrote 
Chateaubriand,  "to  the  general  community  of  mankind,  who 
since  the  creation  of  the  world  have  prayed  to  God."  Others 
carried  this  consciousness  further,  and  tried  to  dedicate  the 
awakening  of  the  religious  temper  and  of  the  historical  mind  of 
Europe  to  the  glorification  of  the  Papacy.  The  old  high  papal 
doctrine  at  its  most  extreme  and  uncompromising  was  put 
forward  by  De  Maistre  in  his  famous  book,  "  Du  Pape,"  which 
directed  men's  attention  to  the  oldest  and  most  historical  in- 
stitution in  Europe  at  the  very  moment  when  their  imagination 
was  stirred  by  its  spiritual  appeal. 

The  brilliant  French  theologian  Lamennais  borrowed  De 
Maistre's  extreme  views  of  the  powers  of  the  Pope,  and  gave 
them  a  twist  in  the  direction  of  democracy,  finding  the  "  perfect 
law  of  liberty"  in  the  most  absolute  obedience  to  the  Pope. 
The  dominion  of  the  Papacy  was  to  his  liberty-loving  spirit  a 
refuge  from  the  encroachments  on  the  rights  of  man  by  the 
revolutionary  government  of  France.  His  followers,  Lacordaire 
and  Montalembert,  fought  the  fight  for  religious  education  in 
France  in  the  name  of  constitutional  liberty  and  papal 
prerogative. 

Gregory  XVI.  deliberately  set  aside  the  opportunity  ofi'ered  to 
the  Papacy  by  the  awakening  of  the  soul  of  Europe.  He 
preferred  the  comfortable  paths  of  reaction  on  old-fashioned 
lines.     "  This  Abbe,"  he  said  of  Lamennais,  "  wanted  to  give  me 

373 


374  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

a  power  with  which  I  should  not  have  known  what  to  do,"  and 
the  Bull  "Mirari  Vos"  condemned  Lamennais' teaching  for  its 
supposed  anarchical  tendencies.  Gregory  greatly  preferred— 
although  he  did  not  altogether  trust  it— the  teaching  of  the 
so-called  Neo-Gwelfs,  whose  views  became  identified  in  Italy  with 
the  party  of  moderate  reformers.  The  romantic  movement  in 
Italy  found  a  natural  expression  in  the  stirring  of  the  cause  of 
national  unity  and  independence.  A  soul-stirring  book  of 
romance  called  "I  Promessi  Sposi,"  pubhshed  in  1827  by 
Manzoni,  ushered  in  the  great  epoch  with  which  the  name  of 
Garibaldi  is  associated.  But  while  "  Young  Italy "  was  as  yet 
a  dream,  the  Neo-Gwelfs  borrowed  from  Gioberti  the  idea  of  an 
absolute  Pope,  raised  to  pre-eminence  in  Europe  by  an  artistic 
and  intellectual  revival,  and  leading  a  federation  of  Italian 
States  to  national  consciousness  as  a  sort  of  combined  Hildebrand 
and  Julius  II.  This  movement,  founded  on  "  I  Promessi  Sposi," 
was  developed  by  the  writings  of  Gioberti  in  1843.  Balbo,  the 
historian  of  the  party,  concentrated  on  the  "  Speranza  d'ltalia"— 
the  liberation  of  Italy  from  foreign  rule.  Italy  was  now  more 
than  ever  a  "geographical  expression,"  and  not  a  nation. 
Lombardy  and  Venetia  were  Austrian,  Piedmont  and  Savoy 
belonged  to  the  vigorous  monarchy  of  Sardinia;  Tuscany  was 
ruled  by  a  Grand  Duke,  who  was  more  or  less  under  the  tutelage 
of  Austria,  and  there  remained— in  addition  to  other  small 
lordships— Naples  and  Sicily,  ruled  by  the  worst  dynasty  which 
had  ever  troubled  the  turbulent  South,  and  lastly  the  Papal 
States  and  the  Patrimony  of  Peter.  To  get  rid  of  Austria,  and 
together  with  her  the  whole  collection  of  petty  lordships  which 
broke  up  the  North;  to  support  rebelhon  in  Naples,  and  lead 
Italy  to  unity  in  some  kind  of  federation  under  the  Pope— this 
was  the  original  scheme  of  Gioberti.  But  as  his  plan  developed, 
he  became  increasingly  interested  in  the  unity  of  Italy,  and  the 
leadership  of  the  Pope  he  came  to  regard  as  a  mere  means  to 
that  end.  In  his  later  book,  published  in  1846,  he  threw  over 
the  Pope  altogether,  and  supported  the  idea  of  federation  under 
the  leadership  of  Piedmont.  The  "  secret "  sympathy  of  Charles 
Albert,  whose  kingdom  included  Piedmont,  Savoy,  and  Sardinia, 
was  already  known  and  discussed  among  members  of  the 
moderate  reform  party.  There  was  much  to  account  for 
Gioberti's  change  of  champions :  Charles  Albert's  kingdom  was 
the  rising  power,  and  it  had  the  good  fortune  to  possess  not  only 
a  King  with  ideas,  but  also  the  wisest  of  European  statesmen  in 
Cavour.  The  Pope,  on  the  other  hand,  was  a  man  of  limited 
outlook,    reactionary    propensities,    and    devoid    of    any    real 


CONCLUSION  375 

sympathy  with  the  ideals  of  Italian  unity  except  as  a  means  of 
glorification  of  the  Papacy. 

There  was,  moreover,  another  current  of  the  reform  move- 
ment more  dangerous,  and  more  definitely  hostile  to  the  existing 
order  of  things,  and  it  was  not  easy  at  this  stage  to  distinguish  very 
clearly  between  them.  Opposed  to  the  Neo-Gwelfs,  but  sharing 
many  of  their  views,  was  the  party  of  extremists  under  Mazzini, 
whose  book,  "  Young  Italy,"  pubhshed  in  1846,  gave  the  whole 
movement  a  European  setting.  Mazzini's  words  were  words  of 
flame,  and  his  teaching  was  the  gospel  of  the  dagger.  The 
princes  of  Italy  could  coquette  with  the  party  of  moderate 
reform,  but  with  the  followers  of  Mazzini  there  could  be  no 
compromise  and  no  understanding.  Such  was  the  state  of  Italy 
as  Metternich  watched  it  with  anxious  attention  in  1846.  Such 
were  also  the  conditions  in  which  Cardinal  Mastai-Ferretti  was 
hailed  with  joy  and  gratitude,  when  he  ascended  the  papal 
throne  as  Pius  IX.  (1846-1878). 

The  pontificate  of  Pius  IX.,  momentous  in  itself,  covered  a 
period  of  tremendous  importance  in  history,  and  it  is  not 
possible  to  give  an  account  of  every  point  at  which  papal  policy 
touched  European  affairs  during  his  reign.  Many  of  the  events 
have  still  the  vividness  and  the  lack  of  proportion  which  belong 
to  contemporary  history.  It  is  difficult  in  1920  to  write  of  recent 
history  except  in  the  aspect  of  a  prelude  to  1914. 

Pius  IX.  was  a  good  man,  ill-matched  with  his  destiny.     The 
enthusiasm  with  which  his  reign  opened  was  due  to  his  well- 
known  sympathy  with  modern  liberal  views,  and  his  first  act  was 
to  pardon  all  the  political  prisoners  who  crowded  the  prisons. 
This  general  amnesty  of  July  16,  1846,  increased  his  popularity, 
but    while    the    populace  hailed  him   with  joy   as   "II   Papa 
Angelico,"  the  Pope  himself  did  not  share  their  delusions.    "  My 
God  !  "  he  had  been  heard  to  exclaim,  "  they  want  to  make  me 
a  Pope,  who  am  only  a  poor  country  parson."      The  amnesty  of 
Pius  was  not  the  bold  initiation  of  the  policy  of  a  liberal  Pope 
—it  was  the  kind-hearted  impulse  of  a  righteous  man.     Other 
liberal  measures  followed  it,  but  these  were  the  outcome  of  his 
pliable  nature,  which  had  not  yet  decided  where  to  take  its  stand. 
In  1847  he  sanctioned  an  advisory  Council  of  State,  which  was 
regarded  as  the  first  step  towards  a  constitution.     In  reality  it 
was  the   last  willing  concession  which  the  Pope  was  ready  to 
make.     Events  were  moving  very  rapidly,    and   the   Pope   was 
carried  along  by  the  stream.     "  The  revolution  wants  no  making, 
it  is  made,"  wrote  a  foreign  statesman  to  King  Charles  Albert. 
The   first   anniversary  of  the  amnesty  was  the  occasion  of  the 


376  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

supposed  Roman  Plot.  It  was  rumoured  that  Austria  had 
planned  an  insurrection  throughout  the  Papal  States  an  favour  of 
reaction,  and  had  offered  help  to  the  Pope.  As  a  result,  Austria 
gained  a  pretext  for  the  occupation  of  Ferrara,  and  a  war  with 
Austria  seemed  to  be  in  sight.  Pius  IX.  made  a  famous  speech 
in  February,  1848,  warning  the  people  against  declaring  war  on 
Austria,  but  in  the  course  of  it  he  used  the  magic  words,  "  God 
bless  Italy !  "  The  crowd  went  its  way  rejoicing  over  the  good 
Italian  views  of  the  Papa  Angelico,  and  forgot  the  rest.  In 
March,  Pius  was  driven,  by  the  success  of  a  revolution  in  Naples, 
which  had  taken  place  in  the  preceding  month,  to  give  a  constitu- 
tion to  the  Papal  States.  It  was  an  unworkable  scheme  by  reason 
of  its  extremely  cautious  and  guarded  character,  but  it  confirmed 
the  popular  estimate  of  his  supposed  liberalism.  Tuscany  and 
Piedmont  had  already  followed  Naples  to  constitutional  liberty, 
and  Cavour  was  rapidly  building  up  the  vigorous  constitutional 
monarchy  which  brought  his  King,  Charles  Albert,  forward  as 
the  natural  leader  of  the  forces  of  liberty  against  the  foreigner 
and  the  oppressor. 

A  rising  in  Vienna  and  the  flight  of  Metternich  brought  the 
opportunity  for  the  Austrian  war,  which  opened  with  the  famous 
"  Five  Days'  "  revolution  in  Milan,  followed  a  fortnight  later  by 
the  proclamation  of  the  Republic  of  Venice.  The  Pope  seemed 
at  first  to  be  ready  to  fall  in  with  the  popular  movement,  but  the 
Jesuits  restrained  him  by  working  on  his  fears  of  a  schism  in 
Austria.  He  therefore  held  aloof  from  the  opening  of  the  war 
and  kept  the  Austrian  ambassador  at  his  side.  But  the  general 
of  the  Roman  army  called  it  a  Crusade,  and  the  Pope  had  to 
follow  where  the  overwhelming  enthusiasm  of  his  subjects  led. 
But  the  war  of  1848,  in  spite  of  the  patriotism  which  inspired  it, 
was  a  failure,  and  the  treaty  of  Salasco  which  ended  it,  restored 
everything  to  Austria  except  Venice,  who  continued  to  make  good 
her  resistance.  The  causes  of  the  failure  lay  in  the  mental  disunion 
of  the  Italian  States.  Before  the  union  of  Italy  was  accomplished, 
the  leaders  were  arguing  among  themselves  as  to  the  form  of 
government  which  should  be  adopted.  The  anarchy  which  had 
followed  the  revolution  in  Naples,  and  the  suicide  of  the  Nea- 
politan constitution  had  lost  the  South. 

When  failure  became  apparent,  Pius  published  an  Encyclical 
denouncing  the  war.  His  subjects  were  already  disillusioned  by 
the  failure  of  his  constitution,  which  in  the  hands  of  the  reactionary 
Secretary  of  State,  Cardinal  Antonelli,  had  proved  to  be  a  mockery 
of  liberty.  The  Encyclical  put  him  definitely  at  variance  with 
his  people,  and  did  him  no  good  with  Austria.     The  Austrians 


CONCLUSION  377 

had  attacked  Bologna  on  the  pretext  of  the  support  given  by  the 
papal  troops  to  Piedmont.  Pius  found  himself  between  two  firea. 
His  friendship  had  no  value  for  Austria,  who  therefore  took  no 
pains  to  get  it,  and  he  neither  dared  nor  wished  to  identify  him- 
self with  the  revolutionary  movement,  which  was  now  avowedly 
Republican  and  Mazzinian.  With  the  help  of  Rossi,  the  leader 
of  the  moderate  reformers,  he  put  forward  a  new  version  of  tiie 
Neo-Gwelf  ideal  in  a  league  of  ItaUan  princes.  The  answer  to 
this  was  the  assassination  of  Rossi  on  November  15,  1848,  and  the 
flight  of  the  Pope  to  Gaeta.  While  Pius  stayed  away  from  Rome, 
a  Republic  was  proclaimed,  and  two  Governments  strove  for 
mastery,  the  one  reactionary,  under  Cardinal  Antonelli,  and  the 
other  revolutionary,  under  Mazzini,  and  associated  with  Mazzini, 
the  striking  figure  of  Garibaldi.  In  April,  1849,  France  inter- 
vened on  behalf  of  the  Pope,  and  after  a  defeat  by  Garibaldi,  the 
French  army  made  an  assault  on  Rome  which  gave  it  a  dominant 
hold  in  the  city. 

It  has  sometimes  been  thought  that  the  Pius  IX.  who  returned 
to  Rome  from  Gaeta  in  1850  was  a  different  man  from  the  Pope 
who  had  left  it  so  hurriedly  sixteen  months  before.  But  it  is 
unlikely  that  Pius  had  undergone  any  great  change  of  mind 
because  his  mind  had  never  been  made  up.  In  the  interval  the 
issue  had  become  clearer,  and  helped  by  AntoneUi,  with  his 
medieval  views  and  his  Machiavellian  temperament,  he  had 
decided  once  and  for  ever  to  take  his  stand  against  liberaUsm  in 
all  its  forms,  and  to  avail  himself  of  whatever  foreign  help  should 
oflfer  the  best  promise  of  permanent  reaction.  This  at  first 
seemed  to  be  France,  and  the  personal  loyalty  of  Napoleon  III. 
was  at  his  service,  as  well  as  the  support  of  the  clerical  party 
in  France.  But  Austria  was  a  more  natural  and  permanent  ally 
for  the  Pope  in  his  capacity  of  ItaHan  ruler,  for  Austria  had  a 
more  fundamental  interest  in  opposing  Italian  unity.  The  fusion 
of  the  two  movements  of  hberahsm  and  of  Itahan  nationality 
was  completed  by  the  development  of  the  power  of  Piedmont 
under  Cavour. 

The  accession  of  "  II  Re  Galantuomo,"  the  wise  young  Victor 
Emmanuel  II.,  to  the  throne  of  Piedmont  was  the  best  hope  of 
Italian  patriots  in  the  evil  days  of  1849.  In  putting  his  house  in 
order  he  had,  of  course,  to  face  what  other  national  leaders  had 
had  to  confront  in  aU  ages,  the  task  of  emancipation  from  papal 
interference  and  clerical  misrule.  Under  the  influence  of  Cavour, 
"a  free  Church  in  a  free  State"  was  gradually  secured.  Tlie 
Siccardi  laws  in  1850  and  the  later  laws  of  Rattazzi  freed  the 
young  kingdom  from  the  complications  and  injustices  of  clerical 


378  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

immunity  from  civil  law,  and  other  forms  of  papal  intervention 
in  the  government.  This  of  course  increased  the  antagonism 
which  was  already  latent  between  the  young  kingdom  and  the 
Papacy.  Piedmont  was  the  protagonist  of  young  Italy  in  the 
struggle  against  Austria.  In  the  period  of  Austrian  oppression 
which  reopened  in  1852,  the  Papacy  backed  the '  oppressors, 
while  Cavour  looked  to  France,  bargaining  with  Napoleon  to 
surrender  Savoy  and  Nice  to  France  as  the  price  of  help  in  the 
Austrian  war.  This  cold-blooded  political  marketing  brought  no 
good  to  the  kingdom  of  Piedmont,  and  the  new  Austrian  war 
ended  in  the  betrayal  of  the  Itahans  by  France  at  the  Peace  of 
Villafranca  in  1859.  Italy  had  gained  nothing,  but  Savoy  and 
Nice  were  lost,  and  "  sold  hke  sheep  "  against  their  will. 

But  the  makers  of  Italy  had  done  their  work,  and  a  series  of 
new  revolts  proved  that  the  soul  of  a  nation,  when  once  it  has 
achieved  consciousness,  has  won  the  victory  that  overcometh. 
Garibaldi's  briUiant  expedition  in  Naples  and  Sicily  brought  in 
the  South,  where  the  rotten  Bourbon  monarchy  crumbled  and 
fell.  In  spite  of  the  spUt  between  Cavour  and  Garibaldi,  Italy 
began  to  hold  together,  land  the  annexation  of  the  Romagna  was 
peacefully  accomphshed.  The  papal  army  under  a  French 
general,  Lamorici^re,  was  ordered  to  disband.  The  Pope's 
refusal  to  carry  out  the  order  gave  Cavour  an  excuse  to  annex 
the  rest  of  the  Papal  States,  and  at  Castelfidando,  September  18, 
1861,  the  Italian  armies  won  the  victory  which  fulfilled  the  pro- 
phecy that  "  Savoy  would  eat  up  the  Itahan  artichoke  leaf  by 
leaf". 

In  February,  1861,  the  first  Parhament  of  United  Italy  met  at 
Turin,  and  it  was  inevitable  that  its  decrees  should  clash  with 
the  papal  prerogative.  The  temporal  power  of  the  Pope  in  Italy 
had  been  reduced  by  conquest  and  annexation  to  the  Patrimony 
of  Peter.  He  was  now  asked  to  forego  all  his  powers,  to  recognise 
a  hostile  civil  code,  with  civil  marriage,  etc.,  as  already  estab- 
lished in  Piedmont,  in  territory  which  had  belonged  to  him  for  a 
thousand  years.  Pius  IX.,  still  urged  along  by  AntoneUi,  decided 
to  harden  his  defences.  Pohtical  concordats  of  the  Papacy  with 
Austria,  Spain,  and  Prussia  had  put  his  foreign  policy  on  a 
reliable  basis.  The  Oxford  Movement  in  England  seemed  to  be 
reveahng  a  less  recalcitrant  spirit  in  a  country  which  had  long 
been  Protestant  in  pohtics  but  never  Protestant  in  mind  or 
aspiration.  Catholic  emancipation  was  still  an  encouraging 
novelty.  Above  all,  his  new  subjects  in  America,  and  those  who 
had  carried  their  Cathohcism  across  the  seas  to  the  new  world, 
made  the  West  radiant  with  hope.     So  Pius  IX.  turned  from  his 


CONCLUSION  379 

temporal  losses  to  the  vision  of  spiritual  victories.  Had  he  been 
a  man  hke  the  saintly  founder  of  that  vision,  Gregory  the  Great, 
he  might  have  won  the  world :  as  it  was,  he  lost  it  by  following 
in  the  footsteps  of  Innocent  III.  He  saw  the  Catholic  Church 
dethroned  and  dispossessed,  and  this,  not  in  an  age  of  indifference 
or  cynicism,  but  at  a  time  of  acute  spiritual  yearning.  The  great 
discoveries  of  science  in  the  nineteenth  century  liad  swept  the 
cobwebs  out  of  Heaven,  and  set  a  light  there,  which  by  consuming 
the  unreal,  revealed  the  true  glory  of  the  Christian  vision.  The 
momentary  pessimism,  which  is  associated  with  the  views  of  the 
early  nineteenth-century  economists,  passed  as  quickly  as  a  cloud, 
and  the  bracing  effect  of  Charles  Darwin's  "  Origin  of  Species  " 
(1859)  kindled  a  brighter  flame  than  the  one  which  it  extinguished. 
When  the  theory  of  evolution  called  its  noble  challenge  to  faith, 
Newman  sang  his  "  Praise  to  the  Hohest  in  the  Height"  (1865), 
and  Browning's  triumphant  assertion  gave  the  answer  of  un- 
daunted faith. 

There  shall  never  be  one  lost  good  !  What  was  shall  Uve  as  before, 
The  evil  is  null,  is  nought,  is  silence  implying  sound, 

What  was  good  shall  be  good,  with  for  evil  so  much  good  more  ; 
On  the  earth  the  broken  arcs  ;  in  the  heaven  a  perfect  round. 

Pius  IX.  lost  touch  with  the  spiritual  aspiration  of  the  world. 
The  series  of  dogmatic  pronouncements  with  which  he  tried  to 
answer  the  anxious  questionings  of  the  nations  was  unsatisfying. 
The  series  began  in  1854  with  the  decree  which  made  the 
Immaculate  Conception  of  the  Virgin  an  essential  article  of  the 
Catholic  Faith.  This  doctrine  had  been  the  subject  of  mediaeval 
dispute  between  the  Thomists  and  the  Scotists  in  the  schools  of 
Paris.  The  Jesuits  afterwards  made  it  a  part  of  their  teachmg 
and  documents  were  forged  in  support  of  it.  The  documents 
were  afterwards  condemned  by  the  Pope,  but  the  belief  in  the 
doctrine  had  already  passed  into  piety.  Vagueness  and  in- 
decision  in  doctrinal  matters  worried  Pius,  in  spite  of  his 
tendency  towards  it  in  political  affairs.  He  therefore  opened  his 
spiritual  bombardment  by  a  pronouncement  which  narrowed  the 
gate  without  fm-thering  the  unity  of  Catholicism. 

The  "Quanta  Cura"  Encyclical  was  the  next  attack,  which 
declared  war  on  the  whole  modern  and  liberal  system  of  ideas. 
The  Syllabus  of  1864  defined  these,  forced  them  all  to  their 
logical  conclusion,  and  condemned  them  indiscriminately.  Pms 
IX.  forced  an  issue  by  his  pedantic  logic,  and  sealed  up  the 
truths  of  rehgion  into  an  inaccessible  treasury  remote  from  the 
heart  of  man.     Among  the  errors  condemned  by  the  Syllabus 


380  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

were  the  questioning  of  the  Pope's  right  to  employ  force,  and  in 
illustration  of  this  lesson  the  celebrated  inquisitor  Arbues  was 
canonised.  ^     The   Syllabus   further  declared  it  to   be  an  error 
to  maintain  that  Popes   had   ever   exceeded  their  powers    or 
encroached  on  the  rights  of  princes— that  the  source  of  clerical 
immunity  from  civil  jurisdiction  lies  in  the  secular  law— that 
other  religions  should  be  tolerated  in  Catholic  countries— that  tlie 
Pope  should  reconcile  himself  with  liberahsm  or  the  progress  of 
civihsation.     The  Syllabus  was  an  indiscreet  and  unnecessary 
document,  raising  ^estions   and  allaying   none,   but   silencing 
discussion  by  the  hammer-strokes  of  a  prerogative  which  has 
still   to   be   defined.      The   Syllabus   sharpened   the   distinction 
between  two  parties  of  Cathohcs :  those  who  tried  to  explain  it 
and  modify  it— who,  Hke  Newman,  held  that  it  was  a  document 
for  experts  without  any  importance  for  the  ordinary  behever ; 
and  those,  on  the  other  hand,  like  Manning  and  WilHam  Ward' 
who  accepted  it  literally  and  submitted  to  the  whole   of   its 
teaching.      One  result   of   the   Syllabus  was   that  through   its 
political  assertions  Pius  lost  the  friendship  of  Napoleon.     By  his 
arrangement   with   Cavour  the   Itahan   Government   moved   to 
Florence,  and  all  the  French  soldiers  left  Rome.     The  idea  that 
Rome   should   be  the   capital   of  the  new   kingdom,   although 
slightly  tinged  with  sacrilege,  was  already  a  possible  development. 
If  the  verdict  on  it  in  Paris  was  the  celebrated  "  Jamais,  jamais ! " 
of  Rouher,  in.  Italy  the  French  Secretary  wrote  to  Cavour :  "  Of 
course  the  result  of  all  this  is  that  you  will  eventually  go  to 
Rome,  but  a  sufficient  interval  must  elapse  to  save  us  from 
responsibility  ". 

But  when  it  came  to  the  point,  the  CathoHcism  of  Napoleon 
was  too  strong  for  him.  The  death  of  Cavour  cleared  the  way 
for  Garibaldi's  independent  action  with  the  radical  wing  of  the 
Young  Italy  party  at  his  back.  He  began  to  attack  Rome,  but 
the  uncertainty  of  the  Italian  Government  gave  Pius  time  to 
collect  an  army  of  defence.  To  this  army  Napoleon  contributed. 
Garibaldi  succeeded  at  Monte  Rotondo  in  October,  1867,  but  the 
Italian  Government  failed  to  support  him  by  stirring  up  a  rising 
in  Rome,  upon  which  he  counted  for  success.  The  French, 
therefore,  defeated  him  at  Montana  on  November  3.  The 
attitude  of  France  was  extremely  irritating  to  the  Italian 
Government,  and  when  in  1870  the  French  wanted  help 
against  Germany,  the  Italians  were  able  to  bargain  for  the 
sacrifice  of  Rome.  Napoleon  was  too  clerical  to  give  in,  but  the 
crisis  of  his  overthrow  effected  the  same  end. 

Before  the  last  round  of  the  old  contest  for  temporal  power 


CONCLUSION  381 

vas  fought  to  a  finish,  the  relentlesB  logic  of  Tius  IX.  brought 
aim  to  the  climax  of  his  reign,  the  Vatican  Council  of  1870. 
His  passion  for  definition  had  Ijrought  into  question  his  authority 
;o  define  the  faith.  The  word  Infallibility  had  been  hovering  on 
he  lips  of  Catholics  throughout  his  reign.  It  was  not  a  sudden 
.nvention  nor  a  wild  fiight  of  papal  pretension.  It  was  simply 
the  logical  conclusion  of  one  view  of  the  character  of  the  Papacy. 
There  was  another  view— the  view  of  the  minority  in  the  Vatican 
Council— but  this  never  found  expression  owing  to  the  unfree 
nature  of  the  proceedings,  and  its  upholders  were  gradually 
reduced  by  strong  censorship  to  twenty  Bishops,  who  stayed 
away  from  the  final  voting  out  of  respect  for  the  Holy  Father. 

On  July  14,  1870,  the  Vatican  Council  passed  the  famous 
definition,  thus  worded,  "  It  is  a  dogma  divinely  revealed  that 
the  Roman  Pontift",  when  he  speaks  ex  cathedra,  that  is,  when, 
in  the  exercise  of  his  ofiice  as  pastor  and  teacher  of  all  Christians, 
he  defines  by  virtue  of  his  supreme  apostolic  authority  doctrine 
concerning  faith  or  morals  to  be  held  by  the  Universal  Church, 
is  by  the  Divine  assistance  promised  to  him  in  the  person  of 
St  Peter,  possessed  of  that  Infallibility  wherewith  the  Divine 
Redeemer  willed  that  His  Church  should  be  endowed  in  defining 
doctrine  concerning  faith  or  morals;  and  that  therefore  such 
definitions  of  the  Roman  Pontifi"  are  unalterable  of  themselves 
and  not  by  reason  of  the  consent  of  the  Church". 

The  Infallibility  decree,  however  important  it  may  be  theo- 
logically, had  very  little  political  importance.  Those  who  had 
come  to  the  Council  to  oppose  it  ended  in  refraining  from  fear  ot 
schism  A  form  of  words  has  a  less  enduring  significance  than  a 
course  of  action,  and  the  minority  were  right  in  the  instinct  which 
told  them  that  posterity  would  look  upon  this  question— so  burn- 
ing in  their  minds  and  consciences— as  a  Sacristry  dispute.  Ihe 
old  Cathohc  schism,  which  some  of  them  embraced,  survives 
to-day  as  a  mere  protest,  and  Dolhnger,  the  chief  opponent  of 
Infallibility,  never  joined  it.  The  Council  itself  was  a  personal 
triumph  for  Pius  IX.,  and  wrapt  in  the  majesty  of  his  victory  tie 
turned  to  face  the  last  defeat  of  temporal  power. 

The  events  leading  to  the  last  battle  of  the  history  ot  the 
Papacy  have  been  vividly  described  by  an  eye-witness.  "  In  that 
burning  summer-time,  we,  who  were  staying  in  Rome  saw  the 
French  Bishops  depart,  and  knew  that  the  French  soldiers  woiild 
soon  follow  them.  .  .  .  Thirty  thousand  Italian  troops  kept  a 
watch  on  the  frontier,  ready  to  break  in  if  the  Romans  would 
seize  Rome.  But,  as  ever,  the  Romans  did  no  more  than  buy 
flags  which  might  be  hmig  out  according  to  iortune,  the  lopes 


382  A  SHOET  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

colours  so  long  as  they  were  needed,  the  tricolour  invented  lon| 
ago  by  Republican  Bologna  when  King  Victor's  regiments  shoulc 
come  marching  in.  The  King  himself  was  torn  between  feehngt 
of  gratitude  to  France,  and  the  conviction  that  if  he  did  not  put 
an  end  to  the  temporal  power  it  would  cost  him  his.  throne.  .  .  . 
After  a  moment  of  hesitation,  ministers  were  allowed  to  act. 
Ponza  di  San  Martino  brought  a  royal  letter  to  the  Vatican  in 
which  'with  the  devotion  of  a  son,  the  faith  of  a  Catholic,  the 
loyalty  of  a  King,  and  the  heart  of  an  Itahan,'  Victor  Emmanue] 
told  Pius  IX.  that  he  intended  to  occupy  the  Papal  States.  The 
Pope  answered  by  a  single  word — 'Might  then  comes  before 
right'.  When  for  the  last  time,  at  the  Piazza  dei  Termini,  he 
made  an  official  appearance  in  public,  the  Holy  Father  was 
greeted  by  the  Romans  with  frantic  enthusiasm.  But  they  had 
their  two  sets  of  flags  ready." 

The  battle  itself  was  a  tournament,  carried  out  with  chivalry 
and  courtesy  on  both  sides.  Negotiations  respectfully  tendered 
were  civilly  declined.  The  conflict  lasted  a  few  minutes  only. 
General  Cadorna  had  secret  orders  to  drive  the  Pope's  troops  to 
the  Leonine  city  and  to  isolate  them  there  with  the  Pope.  The 
Pope  on  his  side  ordered  a  feigned  resistance,  but  the  zeal  of  his 
supporters  caused  a  little  bloodshed  which  a  misunderstanding 
made  inevitable.  "At  ten  o'clock,"  says  Canon  Barry,  "we  saw 
the  white  flag  waving  high  over  St.  Peter's  dome.  We  heard  afar 
off"  from  our  College  roof  the  thunder  of  the  captains  and  the 
shouting,  as  through  the  shattered  walls  of  the  Porta  Pia  streamed 
in  a  mixed  array  of  soldiers,  refugees,  camp  followers,  along  the 
street  afterwards  named  from  the  twentieth  of  September.  Early 
in  the  afternoon  we  saw  Itahan  standards  floating  from  the 
Capitol.  Rome  had  once  conquered  Italy.  Now  Italy  had 
conquered  Rome"  (Canon  William  Barry,  in  "The  Papacy  and 
Modern  Times  "). 

The  tournament  finished  according  to  the  best  traditions  of 
mimic  war,  and  the  military  salute  was  accorded  to  the  vanquished 
by  the  victors,  as  the  papal  army  marched  to  lay  down  its  arms 
in  the  Villa  Belvedere.  In  May,  1871,  the  Law  of  Guarantees 
was  passed  in  the  Itahan  ParHament,  which  "guaranteed"  the 
sovereign  status  of  the  Pope,  his  appropriation  of  the  Vatican 
and  the  Lateran,  his  absolute  and  unfettered  spiritual  authority, 
and  provided  for  him  a  net  endowment  of  £129,000  a  year.  The 
law  was  clumsily  framed,  and  unsuccessfully  proffered.  The 
endowment  was  never  accepted,  and  Pius  IX.  preferred  the 
dignified  poverty  of  a  mendicant  Prince  to  the  compromising 
position  of  an  Italian  pensioner.     His  policy  for  the  next  seven 


CONCLUSION  383 

years  was  in  accordance  with  the  advice  sent  him  by  France, 
'•Protest,  refuse,  and  wait  for  further  mutations  in  France". 
Apart  from  pohtics,  he  remained  on  courteous  terms  with  the 
King  of  Italy.  He  watched  the  affairs  of  the  young  kingdom, 
<ruided,  until  1876,  by  the  Rights,  who  aimed  at  restoring  order 
on  conservative  hues,  and  after  1876  by  the  Lefts,  who  soon 
began  to  stir  up  fresh  agitations  against  Austria,  which  arc  still 
among  the  world  problems  which  the  Peace  of  192U  has  to  solve. 
In  January,  1878,  Pius  sent  his  own  Confessor  to  convey  his 
personal  forgiveness  and  the  Blessed  Sacrament  to  the  "  Gentle- 
man-king "  on  his  death-bed.  A  month  later  Pius  followed  him 
to  the  grave,  his  death  ending  the  last  and  courthest  of  personal 
duels  of  the  temporal  power. 

Leo  XIII.  (1878-1903)  was  elected  by  the  most  peaceful  con- 
clave that  ever  met.  He  brought  to  his  pontificate  a  tactful, 
conciUatory  temperament,  typical  of  the  best  traditions  of  nine- 
teenth-century diplomacy,  but  he  had  a  firm  will  and  views  as 
micorapromising  as  those  of  Pio  Nono  on  the  question  of  the 
temporal  power.  On  the  whole,  in  spite  of  the  circumscribed 
sphere  of  active  Ufe  which  it  entailed,  the  position  of  the  apostolic 
prisoner  was  the  one  which  best  fitted  in  with  the  fact  and  the 
theory  of  the  relationship  between  the  Pope  and  the  King  of 
Italy.  So  Leo  XIII.  prolonged  the  self-imposed  captivity,  in 
spite  of  which  his  pontificate  was  a  brilliant  and  fruitful  epoch 
in  the  history  of  the  Papacy.  His  relations  with  the  Crown,  and 
particularly  with  Victor  Emmanuel  III.,  were  still  more  friendly 
than  before,  and  probably  the  fear  of  loss  of  prestige  in  Europe 
has  been  the  chief  obstacle  in  the  way  of  complete  reconciliation. 
The  Itahan  Government  has  taken  the  CathoUc  missions  in  the 
East  mider  its  protection,  and  under  Pius  X.,  an  Encyclical  of 
June  11,  1905,  called  on  Italian  Catholics  to  be  prepared  to  take 
part  in  the  government  of  Italy. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  tendency  since  1870  throughout  the 
Cathohc  world  has  been  in  the  direction  of  separating  Church  and 
State.  In  France,  the  most  conspicuous  example,  the  EncycUcal, 
"  Immortale  Dei,"  of  1885,  ended  the  opposition  of  the  Catholics 
to  the  RepubHcan  Government.  Gradually  the  Government,  on 
its  side,  came  to  seek  the  support  of  the  Cathohcs  to  coimter- 
balance  the  growth  of  the  opposition  party  of  the  Sociahsts.  But 
the  extremists  in  the  Catholic  party  made  them  tmcomfortable 
bedfellows  for  a  Government  which  was  only  clerical  from  neces- 
sity. In  particular,  the  extreme  CathoUcs,  pushed  on  by  the 
Jesuits,  created  an  anti-Semitic  movement  in  France,  which 
gained  impetus   from    outside  and  culminated  in   the   Dreyfus 


384  A  SHOKT  HISTOEY  OF  THE  PAPACY 

incident.  The  condemnation  of  Dreyfus  for  treason  in  1894,  the 
discovery  of  his  innocence  four  years  later,  and  liis  ultimate 
official  pardon  for  a  crime  which  he  had  never  committed  seemed 
to  the  Republicans,  who  incurred  the  responsibility  for  it,  to 
point  to  an  Ultramontane- Army  plot.  This  was  the  beginning  of 
the  spirit  in  France  which  led  to  the  State  action  against  the 
Religious  Houses  in  1902,  the  quarrel  with  the  Pope  in  1904,  and 
the  final  separation  of  Church  and  State  under  Briand's  Ministry 
in  1906  and  1907.  The  Catholic  Church  in  France,  following  the 
Pope's  advice  and  example,  forfeited  her  privileges  rather  than 
submit  to  anti-clerical  legislation,  and  gained  in  return  that 
claim  on  her  children's  loyalty  which  has  met  with  so  glorious 
a  response. 

"My  Kingdom  is  not  of  this  world,"  was  the  great  political 
inspiration  of  the  Church.  In  the  Middle  Ages  the  Regnum  Dei 
was  one  with  the  earthly  kingdom.  The  men  of  those  days  knew 
no  other  citizenship  than  the  citizenship  of  Heaven ;  their 
failures  were  sins  and  their  virtues  were  Christian  graces.  The 
Church  ennobled  their  wars  and  called  them  Crusades ;  the 
standard  of  Knighthood  was  the  standard  of  the  Grail.  Those 
who  wished  to  do  good  in  association  founded  monasteries ;  the 
inspired  individualist  became  a  hermit  or  built  a  Cathedral.  It 
was  the  glory  of  the  Papacy  that  it  held  the  whole  world  in 
obedience  to  the  Christian  ideal ;  it  was  its  inevitable  danger 
that  all  the  activities  of  men  and  the  manifold  forms  of  life  and 
enterprise  pressed  into  the  fold,  and  crowded  under  the  Church's 
banner.  Temporal  power,  and  all  the  secularities  which  flowed 
from  it ;  worldliness,  and  the  wickedness  of  the  world — the  over- 
exuberant,  hedonistic  life  of  the  Renaissance — these  forces 
flooded  in,  and  it  was  hard  for  the  Popes,  themselves  the  children 
of  their  generation,  to  set  a  limit  to  the  boundaries  of  Heaven. 
The  greatest  of  the  political  discoveries  of  the  modern  world  is 
the  separation  of  the  various  functions  of  government.  This 
was  an  easier  and  therefore  an  earlier  discovery  than  the 
greater  separation  of  Church  and  State.  The  later  history  of  the 
Papacy  is  the  gradual  rediscovery  of  the  true  foundation  of 
spiritual  power,  and  the  readjustment  of  the  world  to  that  end. 
With  the  withdrawal  of  the  Church  from  the  world  has  come  the 
awakening  of  the  world's  need  for  religion.  The  questions  have 
been  asked — What  have  the  Churches  done  to  heal  the  wounds  of 
the  world-war  ?  Why  was  the  Pope's  intervention  so  futile  and 
so  unheeded  ?  Why  is  peace  on  earth  still  a  vision  unfulfilled  ? 
To  these  questions  there  are  many  answers,  but  in  the  history  of 
the  Papacy  there  is  one  to  be  found.     The  Church  is  a  protest, 


CONCLUSION  385 

pointing  to  God.  Other  ages,  accepting  war  and  social  violence 
IS  consistent  with  their  cruder  conscience,  called  God  to  their 
lid  as  the  Captain  of  their  hosts.  But  we,  in  our  generation, 
lave  our  clearer  discernment  of  the  essential  incongruity  between 
jhe  passions  which  produce  war  and  which  war  produces,  and 
the  nature  of  the  Christian  faith.  These  things  silence  our 
prayers,  and  even  make  us  intolerant  of  the  intervention  of 
religion  in  warfare.  Rightly  or  wrongly  we  ofifer  up,  not  the 
k^ictory,  but  the  suffering  to  God,  who  is  our  King. 


25 


INDEX 


Abelard,  142-146. 
Acacius  of  Constantinople,  29. 
iEneas  Sylvius,  259,  262,  276. 
Agapetus  I.,  32. 

—  II.,  89-91. 
Agathon,  54. 

Agilulf  of  Lombardy,  44,  45. 

Alaric,  16,  18. 

Alberic,  87-91. 

Albornoz,  Cardinal,  222-225. 

Alexander  II.,  110-114. 

—  III.,  150-155. 

—  IV.,  179-180. 

—  VI.,  287-298. 

—  VII.,  352-356. 
Alfonso  of  Naples,  258-267. 

Aragon,  245-256. 

Anaclete,  139,  140. 
Anagori,  199-201. 
Anastasius  I.,  16. 

—  II.,  29. 

Arians,  11-18,  30-35. 

Arnold  of  Brescia,  143,  145-149. 

Astolf  of  Lombardy,  60-62. 

Athanasius,  11-13. 

Attila,  26,  27. 

Augustine,  40-46. 

Avignon,  203-226. 

Basil,  Emperor,  82, 
Basle,  Council  of,  253-257. 
Becket,  Thomas,  152,  153. 
Belisarius,  32-34. 
Benedict  Antipope,  233-236. 

—  m.,  78,  79. 

—  Vn.,95,  96. 

—  Vm.,  101,  102. 

—  IX.,  102-106. 

—  XI.,  201,  202. 

—  XII.,  215-217. 

—  XIV.,  362,  363. 
Benedictines,  37,  88. 
Berengar  of  Friuli,  86,  87, 

Ivrea,  89-93. 

Boniface  I.,  20. 

—  III.,  51. 

—  IV.,  51. 

—  VIII.,  191-200. 

—  IX.,  231-234. 


Borgia,  290-298. 

Braccio,  247,  258. 

Brakespeare,  Nicholas,  sea  Hadrian  iV. 

Bruno  of  Toul,  see  Leo  IX. 

Cadalus  Antipope,  110-114. 
Caius,  4. 

Calcedon,  Council  of,  24,  32,  33. 
Calixtus  I.,  7. 

—  II.,  136,  137. 
Calvin,  326. 
Canossa,  120,  121. 

Carlo  Borromes,  Cardinal,  331-334. 
Carloman,  65,  66. 
Cavour,  374-380. 
Celestine  I.,  20,  21. 

—  v.,  191,  192. 
Celidonius,  25. 
Cencius,  117. 

Cesarini,  Cardinal,  254-259. 
Charles  Albert  of  Piedmont,  374-376. 

—  Augustus,  65-71. 

—  Martel,  58-61. 

—  of  Anjou,  182-191. 
Spain,  309-325. 

—  IV.,  216-224. 

—  v.,  329-330. 

—  VIII.,  287-292. 
Christophorus,  64-66. 
Clement  II.,  104-105. 

—  IV.,  183-187. 

—  v.,  202-205. 

—  VI.,  217-220. 

—  VII.,  229-233. 

—  VIII.,  341-344. 

—  XI.,  360-361. 

Cognac,  League  of,  315,  316. 
Concordat,  First,  367. 
Conrad  II.,  102,  103. 

—  Hohenstaufen,  144-146. 
Conradin,  178,  180,  186, 187. 
Consalvi,  Cardinal,  370,  371. 
Constance,  Council  of,  238-242. 
Constans  I.,  12. 

—  n.,  53,  54. 
Constantine,  9. 

—  Copronymous,  60. 

—  Pogonatus,  54. 
Constantius,  11-13. 

387 


388 


A  SHOET  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 


Crescent,  94-101, 109. 
Cyril  of  Alexandria,  20. 

Damasus,  13. 

Dante,  194-208. 

Desiderius  of  Lombardy,  63-68. 

Monte  Cassino,  see  Victor  III. 

Deusdedit,  52. 

Djem,  287-291. 

Domnus,  54. 

Donations  of  Constantine,  67,  68. 

Edward  I.  of  England,  194-196. 

—  III.  of  England,  219. 
Elizabeth  of  England,  832-339. 
Ephesus  "  Robber  Council,"  24. 
Eugenius  III.,  145,  146. 

—  IV.,  253-260. 
Eulalius,  20. 

Eutychianism,  24,  32,  33. 
Eutychius,  57, 

Pemx  III.,  29. 

—  IV.,  31,  32. 

—  Antipope,  13. 
Ferdinand  I.,  331-333. 

—  II.,  346-349. 
Flavian,  24. 

Flotte,  Peter,  196,  198. 
Formosus,  84. 
Francis,  322-324. 
Frangipani,  138,  139. 
Frederick  Barbarossa,  146-156. 

—  II.,  159-178. 

—  III.,  262-276. 

Garibaddi,  374-380. 
Gelaaius  11.,  136. 
Genseric,  26,  27. 
Gerbert,  see  Sylvester  II. 
Godfrey  of  Tuscany,  108-112. 
Gregory  II,,  56-58, 

—  Ill,,  58. 

—  IV.,  75. 

—  v.,  97,  98. 

—  VI.,  103,  104. 

—  VII,,  104-124. 

—  IX.,  169-174. 

—  X.,  187-189. 

—  XI.,  227-228, 

—  XII,,  234-243, 

—  XIII.,  336-338. 
Gustavus  Adolphus,  849. 

Hadrian  I.,  65-69. 

—  II„  82,  83. 

—  IV.,  146-151. 

—  VI.,  312,  313 

Hanno  of  Cologne,  111-113, 
Henry  II„  101-102. 


Henry  III.,  108. 

—  IV.,  108-131. 

—  v.,  131-138, 

—  VI.,  156-158, 

—  VIII.  of  England,  317-320. 

—  IV.  of  France,  339-345. 
Heraclius,  52, 
Hermas,  5. 

Hilary  of  Aries,  25. 

Sardinia,  29. 

Hildebrand,  see  Gregory  VII. 
Hippolytus,  6,  7. 
Honorius  I,,  52, 

—  II.,  137-139. 

—  III.,  168-169. 
Hormesdas,  30. 
Hugh  Capet,  96. 
Huss,  John,  238-241. 

iKPAiiLiBiLiTY,  Decree  of,  381. 
Innocent  I.,  3,  15-21. 

—  II„  139, 

—  m.,  157-166. 

—  IV.,  174-179. 

—  v.,  220-223. 

—  VIII.,  285-288. 

—  X,,  352-355, 

—  XI,,  357-358, 

—  XII.,  358-360, 
Inquisition,  329-342. 

Jansenists,  351-363. 

Jesuits,  323-364, 

Joanna  of  Naples,  218-230,  247-256. 

John  I.,  30,  31. 

—  II.,  32. 

—  III.,  35. 

—  VI.,  56. 

—  VIII.,  83. 

—  IX.,  85, 

—  X.,  86. 

—  XI.,  87,  88. 

—  XII.,  89-93. 

—  XIII.,  94. 

—  XIV.,  95. 

—  XV.,  96,  97. 

—  XVII.,  100. 

—  XVIII.,  100, 

—  XIX.,  102. 

—  XXII.,  205-215. 

—  XXIII.,  237-241. 

—  the  Faster,  43. 
Judices,  64. 
Julius  I.,  11. 

—  II.,  282-304. 
Justin,  29,  30. 
Justinian,  32-35. 

Ladislas,  232-238. 

Lambert  of  Spoleto,  84,  85,  90. 

Lawrence,  29. 


INDEX 


389 


Leander  of  Seville,  46. 
Leo  I.,  22-27,  41,  46. 

—  III.,  69-74. 

—  IV.,  77. 

—  VII.,  88,  89. 

—  VIII.,  92,  93. 

—  IX.,  106,  108. 

—  X.,  304-312. 
_  Xin.,  383. 

—  the  Isthaurian,  56-59. 
Lewis  the  Pious,  74-82. 

—  of  Bavaria,  209-216. 
Literius,  12,  13. 
Liutprand,  57-60. 
Lothar,  75-77. 
Lothian,  138,  139. 
Louis  III.,  249,  250. 

—  XI.,  271-284. 

—  XIL,  294-806. 

—  XIV.,  353-360. 
Luther,  311-318. 

Lyons,  Decree  of,  175,  176. 

MACHiAVEiiiii,  284-296. 
Manfred,  178-186. 
Manichseans,  23. 
Marcionism,  5,  6. 
Marcus  Aurelius,  8. 
Marius  I.,  84. 
Marjorian,  27. 
Marozia,  86-88. 
Marsiglio  of  Padua,  209-216. 
Martin  I.,  53,  54. 

—  v.,  242,  243,  247-253. 

Matilda  of  Tuscany,  112-122,  128-138. 
Maurice  (Emperor),  39,  42-45. 
Maximilian,  292-311. 

—  of  Bavaria,  347-348. 
Mazarin,  354,  355. 
Mazzini,  375-377. 
Medici,  281-314. 
Metternich,  371-377. 
Milan,  Council  of,  9-12. 
Monarchianism,  7. 
Monophysitism,  29,  30,  52. 
Monothelitism,  52-54. 
Montanism,  6. 

Nantes,  Edict  of,  355. 
Napoleon,  365-368. 
Nestorian  Controversy,  20. 
Nicsaa,  11. 
Nicholas  I.,  79-81. 

—  II.,  109-110. 

—  v.,  262-265. 
Nogant,  198-200. 

Oratorians,  320. 
Otto  the  Great,  89-95. 

—  II.,  94-95. 

—  III.,  95-100. 


Pascal,  352,  353. 
Paschalis  I.,  74,  75. 

—  II.,  131-136. 
Patarines,  114-116. 
Patripassioncm,  see  Monarchianism. 
Paul  I.,  63. 

—  II.,  276-278, 

—  m.,  320-325. 

—  IV.,  329-331. 

—  v.,  345-347. 
Pazzi,  282,  283. 
Pelagius,  19,  34-40. 
Pepin,  62-05. 

Peter  Damian,  103-113. 

—  Pieroni,  see  Anaclete  II. 
Petrarch,  221-226. 

Philip  Augustus,  159-103. 

—  le  Bel,  194-207. 

Phillip  II.  of  Spain,  330-341. 
Phocas,  42,  51,  52. 
Pisa,  Council  of,  230,  237. 
Pius  II.,  259-276. 

—  IV.,  331-333. 

—  v.,  333-336. 

—  VI.,  363-360. 

—  VII.,  366-371. 

—  IX.,  375-383. 
Polycarp,  see  Justin. 
Porcaro,  262-264. 
Port  Royal,  352-355. 
Praxeas,  7. 
Priscillianism,  25. 
Pulcheria,  24. 
Pyrrbus,  52. 

Ratisbon,  Congress  of,  321,  322. 

Riario,  281-285. 

Richelieu,  347-354. 

Rienzi,  Cola  di,  217-222. 

Robert  Guiscard,  116,  121-123,  128. 

Roger  of  Sicily,  139-144. 

Revere,  della,  278-304. 

Rudolf,  Emperor,  186-190. 

Satellius,  7. 

Saint  Augustine,  40,  46. 

—  Benedict,  13,  37-39, 

—  Bernard,  13,  139-146. 

—  Bonaventura,  187-188. 

—  Catherine  of  Siena,  227-229. 

—  Clement,  4. 

—  Columbian,  46. 

—  Dominic,  166. 

—  Francis  of  Assisi,  166. 

—  Germain,  Declaration  of,  357,  358. 

—  Gregory,  37-48. 

—  Ignatius,  323-329. 

—  Jerome,  13-18. 

—  Justin,  5,  6. 

—  Peter,  3. 

Damian,  103-113. 


390 


A  SHOET  HISTOKY  OF  THE  PAPACY 


Saint  Thomas  Aquinas,  207,  208. 

Sardica,  Council  of,  12,  16. 

Savonarola,  288-292. 

Sergius  I.,  54,  55. 

Severinus,  52. 

Sforza,  243-259,  282-290. 

Sigismund,  237-242,  254-257. 

Silverius,  32,  33. 

Simplicius,  28,  29. 

Siricius,  14. 

Sixtus  III.,  20. 

—  IV.,  279-283. 

—  v.,  337-341. 
Stephen  II.,  61,  62. 

—  III.,  65. 

—  IV.,  74,  109. 

—  v.,  84. 

—  of  Hungary,  99. 
Stilicho,  17,  18. 
Sylvester  I.,  9-11. 

—  II.,  98. 

—  III.,  103,  104. 
Symmachus,  29. 

Theodatus,  32. 

Theodora,  86. 

Theodore,  52. 

Theodoric,  29-31. 

Theodosius,  24. 

Theophilus,  17. 

Totila,  34. 

Toto  of  Naples,  64. 

Trent,  Council  of,  321-324,  331-334. 

Trinitarian  Controversy,  11,  20. 


Unigenitus,  Bull,  361. 
Urban  II.,  128-130. 

—  IV.,  182. 

—  v.,  223-227. 

—  VI.,  229-231. 

—  VIII.,  347-351. 
Ursincinus,  13. 


Valentinian,  17. 
Verdun,  Treaty  of,  75. 
Victor  I.,  7. 

—  II.,  108. 

—  III.,  124-128. 

—  Antipope,  151,  152. 

—  Emmanuel,  377-383. 
Vigilius,  32-35. 
Vitalian,  53. 
Voltaire,  363. 


Wallenstein,  347-349. 
Westphalia,  349-351. 
William  of  Champeaux,  142. 

—  I.  of  England,  114,  121. 

—  III.  of  England,  359,  360. 

—  of  Ockham,  208-211. 
Worms,  Edict  of,  312-314. 
Wycliffe,  John,  238-241. 


Zeno,  29. 
Zephyrinus,  7. 
Zosimus,  19. 


PRINTED  IN   GREAT  BRITAIN   AT   THE   UNIVERSITY   PRESS,   ABERDEEN 


Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Libraries 


1    1012  01218  0842 


